in Re Walter Alexander Cruz
Opinion
Opinion issued November 5, 2019
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
habeas corpus and an order discharging him from custody, or a reduction in the amount of the bond.
This Court does not have “original habeas corpus jurisdiction of a bail issue”
in a criminal case. Ortiz v. State, 299 S.W.3d 930, 932 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2009, no pet.) (citing TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(d)); Ex parte Enriquez, 2 S.W.3d 362, 363 & n.1 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.)); see Ex parte Barnes, No. 03-13-00429-CV, 2013 WL 3723333, at *1 (Tex. App.— Austin July 12, 2013, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (dismissing for want of jurisdiction application for writ of habeas corpus seeking release or reduction in appeal bond when relator was convicted of felony offense of aggravated assault). In criminal matters, our habeas corpus jurisdiction is appellate only, and we do not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction. Ex parte Denby, 627 S.W.2d 435, 435 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, orig. proceeding); see also Chavez v. State, 132 S.W.3d 509, 510 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (citing TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221) (“A court of appeals does not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in felony cases.”)
Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Hightower, and Countiss. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
in Re Walter Alexander Cruz (in Re Walter Alexander Cruz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.