No. 05-03-00991-CR
Opinion Filed January 22, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.
On Appeal from the 15th Judicial District Court, Grayson County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 047569. Affirmed.
Before Justices MOSELEY, FITZGERALD, and LANG.
Opinion By Justice MOSELEY.
Deborah Denise Llast appeals the trial court's May 12, 2003 letter ruling denying relief on her application for writ of habeas corpus. We affirm the trial court's ruling.
Background
On August 4, 2000, the Grayson County Sheriff's Department executed a narcotics search warrant at a clandestine laboratory. As a result of the execution of the warrant, appellant was charged with (1) possession of drug paraphernalia ("the paraphernalia case" hereinafter) and (2) manufacture of methamphetamine in an amount of four grams or more but less than 200 grams ("the methamphetamine case" hereinafter). A jury convicted appellant of possession of drug paraphernalia and assessed a $500 fine. Appellant then filed a special plea of double jeopardy and application for writ of habeas corpus in the methamphetamine case contending its further prosecution would subject her to double jeopardy. After a hearing on the merits of the writ application, the trial court denied relief. This appeal ensued. Discussion
A certification of the right of appeal was not filed with the notice of appeal or with the record. See Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(d). See also Ex parte Tarango, 116 S.W.3d 201, 203 (Tex. App.-El Paso 2003, no pet.) (concluding certification requirement of rule 25.2(d) applies to habeas corpus appeals). By letter dated July 7, 2003, the Court directed appellant's retained counsel to file a copy of the certification within thirty days or the appeal would be dismissed. Appellant did not comply with the Court's directive. The State filed an October 27, 2003 motion to dismiss the appeal for failure to file the certification. Appellant did not respond to the State's motion. By order issued October 29, 2003, the Court denied the State's motion, ordered the trial court to file the certification, and ordered appellant to file her brief by November 24, 2003. Appellant did not file a brief. The State has filed a brief contending the offenses contain dissimilar elements and, therefore, the successive prosecutions do not expose appellant to double jeopardy. We review the trial court's ruling for an abuse of discretion. Ex parte Lafon, 977 S.W.2d 865, 867 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1998, no pet.). We determine the appeal on the law and facts shown by the record. See Tex.R.App.P. 31.2. Our review of the record shows appellant cited no authority in the trial court to support her contentions. Furthermore, she has not filed a brief on appeal and has not responded to this Court's directives. We conclude appellant has failed to prosecute her appeal, her contentions are inadequately briefed, and she has not presented any legal issue for our review. See Tex.R.App.P. 31.2; Lagrone v. State, 942 S.W.2d 602, 614 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's letter ruling denying relief on appellant's application for writ of habeas corpus.