In Re Quentin Smith v. the State of Texas

CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
DecidedJuly 3, 2026
Docket03-26-00595-CV
StatusPublished

This text of In Re Quentin Smith v. the State of Texas (In Re Quentin Smith v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Quentin Smith v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-26-00595-CV

In re Quentin Smith

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM COMAL COUNTY

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Applicant Quentin Smith, an inmate in the Comal County Jail, has filed a pro se

original application for writ of habeas corpus in which he requests immediate release under article

17.151 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure and contends that his prosecution and bail amount

are retaliation for his exercise of his First Amendment rights, that he is being subjected to cruel

and unusual punishment in violation of article 1.09 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and that

the State is suppressing exculpatory evidence. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 1.09 (prohibiting

excessive bail and fines and cruel and unusual punishment), 17.151, § 1(1) (requiring that

defendant “must be released either on personal bond or by reducing the amount of bail required, if

the state is not ready for trial of the criminal action for which he is being detained within . . .

90 days from the commencement of his detention”).

The original habeas corpus jurisdiction of a court of appeals is limited to cases

where a person’s liberty is restrained because he or she has violated an order, judgment, or decree

in a civil case. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221(d); In re Reece, 341 S.W.3d 360, 364 n.3 (Tex.

2011) (orig. proceeding). Courts of appeals have no original habeas jurisdiction in criminal matters. In re Ayers, 515 S.W.3d 356, 356–57 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, orig.

proceeding) (per curiam); see Ex parte Braswell, 630 S.W.3d 600, 601–02 (Tex. App.—Waco

2021, orig. proceeding); see also Dodson v. State, 988 S.W.2d 833, 835 (Tex. App.—San Antonio

1999, no pet.) (“The courts of appeals have no original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal

matters; their jurisdiction is appellate only.”). Original jurisdiction to grant a writ of habeas corpus

in a criminal case is vested in the Court of Criminal Appeals, the district courts, the county courts,

or a judge of those courts. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.05; see Ayers, 515 S.W.3d at 356.

Accordingly, we dismiss Smith’s original application for writ of habeas corpus for

want of jurisdiction.

__________________________________________ Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Theofanis

Filed: July 3, 2026

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Reece
341 S.W.3d 360 (Texas Supreme Court, 2011)
Dodson v. State
988 S.W.2d 833 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)
in Re Avery Lamarr Ayers
515 S.W.3d 356 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
In Re Quentin Smith v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-quentin-smith-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp3-2026.