Linda Lizette Lerma v. the State of Texas
This text of Linda Lizette Lerma v. the State of Texas (Linda Lizette Lerma v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion issued May 6, 2021
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-21-00096-CR ——————————— LINDA LIZETTE LERMA, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 461st District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 82180-CR
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On October 17, 2018, a jury found appellant, Linda Lizette Lerma, guilty of
the felony offense of murder. The jury sentenced appellant to forty years’
confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Our Court affirmed
appellant’s conviction on direct appeal. See Lerma v. State, No. 01-18-00999-CR, 2019 WL 5996380, at *1 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 14, 2019, no pet.)
(mem. op, not designated for publication). The mandate issued on January 24, 2020.
On February 1, 2021, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal seeking a second
appeal from her final 2018 conviction. The notice of appeal is untimely, but more
fundamentally we lack jurisdiction to consider a second appeal of appellant’s final
conviction. See Hines v. State, 70 S.W. 955, 957 (Tex. Crim. App. 1902) (“[O]nly
one appeal can be made from a verdict and judgment of conviction in any case.”).
The exclusive post-conviction remedy in final felony convictions in Texas courts is
through a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.07 of the Texas Code of
Criminal Procedure. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 5 (providing that “[a]fter
conviction, the procedure outlined in this Act shall be exclusive and any other
proceeding shall be void and of no force and effect in discharging the prisoner”); see
Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 43.2(f); see, e.g., Hosea v. State, No. 01-11-01050-CR, 2012 WL 2345351, *1
(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] June 21, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated
for publication) (dismissing for want of jurisdiction defendant’s subsequent appeal
of conviction that had previously been affirmed); Arabzadegan v. State, No. 03-19-
00728-CR, 2020 WL 370880, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 23, 2020, pet. ref'd)
(mem. op., not designated for publication) (same); McDonald v. State, 401 S.W.3d
2 360, 361–63 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2013, pet. ref'd) (same). Any pending motions
are dismissed as moot.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Goodman and Farris.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Linda Lizette Lerma v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linda-lizette-lerma-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2021.