In Re Kenneth Johnson, Jr. v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 16, 2025
• Docket: 13-25-00322-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-25-00322-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

IN RE KENNETH JOHNSON JR.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Silva, Peña, and Cron Memorandum Opinion by Justice Silva1

Relator Kenneth Johnson Jr. has filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus

seeking the dismissal of the indictment against him in trial court cause number 25352 in

the 23rd District Court of Wharton County, Texas. Relator’s petition for writ of habeas

corpus includes an emergency motion to suspend the warrant for his arrest.

1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not

required to do so. When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case.”); id. R. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions). Original habeas jurisdiction in criminal proceedings is limited to the Texas Court of

Criminal Appeals, the district courts, and the county courts. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.

ANN. art. 11.05; Ex parte Braswell, 630 S.W.3d 600, 601 (Tex. App.—Waco 2021, orig.

proceeding); In re Quinata, 538 S.W.3d 120, 120 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2017, orig.

proceeding). Therefore, as an intermediate court of appeals, we lack original habeas

jurisdiction in criminal matters. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(d); In re Neal, 653

S.W.3d 346, 346 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2022, orig. proceeding); In re Spriggs, 528 S.W.3d

234, 236 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2017, orig. proceeding). Instead, our jurisdiction in such

matters is appellate in nature. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(d); Dodson v. State,

988 S.W.2d 833, 835 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1999, no pet.); Denby v. State, 627

S.W.2d 435, 435 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, orig. proceeding) (per curiam).

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of habeas

corpus and the applicable law, is of the opinion that we lack jurisdiction to issue the

requested relief. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(d); In re Neal, 653 S.W.3d at 346;

In re Spriggs, 528 S.W.3d at 236. Accordingly, we dismiss this original proceeding and

relator’s emergency motion to suspend the warrant for his arrest for lack of jurisdiction.

CLARISSA SILVA Justice

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2 (b).

Delivered and filed on the 16th day of June, 2025.