Marvin Eugene Gates, Jr. v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director of TDCJ-ID

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 22, 2021
Docket10-21-00345-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Marvin Eugene Gates, Jr. v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director of TDCJ-ID (Marvin Eugene Gates, Jr. v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director of TDCJ-ID) 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.

Bluebook
Marvin Eugene Gates, Jr. v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director of TDCJ-ID, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-21-00345-CR

MARVIN EUGENE GATES, JR., Appellant v.

BOBBY LUMPKIN, DIRECTOR OF TDCJ-ID, Appellee

United States District Court Western District of Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On December 20, 2021, Marvin Eugene Gates Jr., filed a pro se “Writ of

Supersedeas” in this Court, complaining about the dismissal of his application for writ of

habeas corpus filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

and seeking to proceed with an appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254. We lack jurisdiction over

any aspect of federal habeas-corpus proceedings. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) (stating that

“[t]he [U.S.] Supreme Court, a Justice thereof, a circuit judge, or a district court shall

entertain an application for a writ of habeas corpus [o]n behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in

violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.”); see also Slagle v.

State, No. 02-16-00097-CR, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 4468, at *2 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Apr.

28, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op.) (per curiam); In re Commitment of Goodwin, No. 01-14-00734-

CV, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 11915, at **1-2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 30, 2014,

no pet.) (mem. op.). We therefore dismiss this proceeding. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f).

Gates may file a motion for rehearing with this Court within fifteen (15) days after

the opinion and judgment are rendered. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1. If Gates desires to have

the decision of this Court reviewed by filing a petition for discretionary review, that

petition must be filed with the Court of Criminal Appeals within thirty (30) days after

either this Court’s judgment was rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing

was overruled by this Court. See id. at R. 68.2(a).

STEVE SMITH Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Dismissed Opinion delivered and filed December 22, 2021 Do not publish [CR25]

Gates v. Lumpkin Page 2

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Marvin Eugene Gates, Jr. v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director of TDCJ-ID, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marvin-eugene-gates-jr-v-bobby-lumpkin-director-of-tdcj-id-texapp-2021.