Roy Everet Caster v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 30, 2006
• Docket: 12-05-00119-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

                                                NOS. 12-05-00119-CR

          12-05-00137-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

ROY EVERET CASTER,     §                      APPEAL FROM THE SEVENTH

APPELLANT

V.        §                      JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE   §                      SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

            Roy Everet Caster appeals from an order denying him copies of court records that he wished to use to pursue an application for a writ of habeas corpus.  We dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction.

Background

            In 2001, Appellant pleaded guilty to several felony offenses.  Penitentiary sentences were assessed, and he waived appeal.  In 2005, Appellant filed a pro se motion captioned “Indigent Prisoner’s Motion to Obtain Records.”  In his motion, Appellant asked the trial court to lend him copies of trial records including trial transcripts, the clerk’s record, and descriptions of all exhibits and physical evidence, so that he could prepare an application for a writ of habeas corpus. The trial court denied the motion and this appeal followed.

Jurisdiction

            We lack jurisdiction to review a trial court’s ruling on a request for a copy of the record unless it is in conjunction with an appeal over which we have jurisdiction.  Self v. State, 122 S.W.3d 294, 294–95 (Tex. App.–Eastland 2003, no pet.); Everett v. State, 91 S.W.3d 386, 386 (Tex. App.–Waco 2002, no pet.).  Jurisdiction for postconviction writs of habeas corpus in felony cases is specifically vested in the court of criminal appeals.  See Hoang  v. State, 872 S.W.2d 694, 697 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 § 3 (Vernon 2005).

            This is not a direct appeal or related to a direct appeal, and the trial court’s decision to deny Appellant’s motion does not invoke our jurisdiction.

Disposition

            These appeals are dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Opinion delivered June 30, 2006.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J. and Griffith, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)