REYES-JUAREZ; EX PARTE LUIS FERNANDO v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 11, 2024
• Docket: PD-0412-24
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

NOS. PD-0107-24, PD-0411-24, PD-0412-24 & PD-0413-24

EX PARTE WILMER RAMOS-MORALES, EX PARTE ALVARO ORDUNA- ARELLANO, LUIS FERNANDO REYES-JUAREZ & MIGUEL ANGEL MELO- SANCHEZ, Appellants

ON STATE’S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE EL PASO COURT OF APPEALS KINNEY COUNTY

Per curiam. YEARY, J., dissented.

OPINION

In each of these cases, Appellant was arrested for trespassing on private property.

See TEX. PENAL CODE § 30.05(a). He filed a pretrial application for a writ of habeas

corpus, arguing that the State was selectively prosecuting him in violation of his equal

protection rights. In each case, the trial court denied relief, Appellant appealed, and the

court of appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling denying relief and remanded the case to the trial court with instructions to dismiss the case.1

The State has filed a petition for discretionary review in each case, challenging the

court of appeals’ holding that Appellant’s claim is cognizable in a pretrial habeas

application. In cause number PD-0107-24, the State also argues that the court of appeals

erred by ordering Appellant’s discharge rather than remanding the case for further

development of the record. We recently handed down our opinion in Ex parte Aparicio,

No. PD-0461-23, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tex. Crim. App. October 9, 2024), in which we held

that Aparicio’s selective prosecution claim was cognizable in a pretrial habeas

application. We also held that Aparicio did not make a prima facie showing that he was

arrested and prosecuted because of his gender.

Consistent with our opinion in Aparicio, we grant review on our own motion of the

following ground in each case:

Did Appellant make a prima facie showing that he was arrested and prosecuted because of his gender?

Accordingly, in each case, we vacate the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the

case to that court in light of our opinion in Aparicio. The State’s petitions are refused. No

motions for rehearing will be entertained, and the Clerk is instructed to immediately issue

mandate.

1 Ex parte Ramos-Morales, No. 08-23-00282-CR (Tex. App.—El Paso December 20, 2023); Ex parte Orduna-Arellano, No. 08-23-00233-CR (Tex. App.—El Paso January 12, 2024); Ex parte Reyes-Juarez, No. 08-23-00295-CR (Tex. App.—El Paso January 12, 2024); Ex parte Melo-Sanchez, No. 08-23-00301-CR (Tex. App.—El Paso January 12, 2024). DATE DELIVERED: DECEMBER 11, 2024 DO NOT PUBLISH