Opinion
02-22-00080-CR
06-23-2022
Ex parte Ira Henry III
Do Not Publish Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b)
On Appeal from the 297th District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. C-297-W012113-0644657-H
Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
On April 26, 2022, we sent Ira Henry III a letter stating,
The trial court clerk forwarded to this court your document titled, "The State of Texas," dated April 15, 2022. After reviewing the document, we are unclear whether you are attempting to appeal the "Findings and Order" signed by the magistrate judge on April 5, 2022, to this court. If you are appealing the trial court's "Findings and Order" to this court, we are concerned that the court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. This court does not have jurisdiction over matters related to postconviction relief from an otherwise final felony conviction. See Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (orig. proceeding); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07; Bd. of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (orig. proceeding).
Unless appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal files with the court on or before Friday, May 6, 2022, a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal, the appeal may be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f)[,] 44.3.
The "Findings and Order" states, "This Court finds that the eighth application for writ of habeas corpus of IRA HENRY III ('Applicant') does not meet the requirements for consideration as a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus" and "recommends that it be DISMISSED AS A SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION pursuant to [A]rticle 11.07, § 4 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure."
The documents attached to the notice of appeal include a copy of the June 18, 1998 judgment, in which Henry was found guilty of murder and sentenced to forty-five years' confinement, and a copy of the opinion and judgment from this court affirming the trial court's judgment. See Henry v. State, No. 2-98-297-CR (Tex. App.- Fort Worth Oct. 28, 1999, no pet.) (not designated for publication).
Henry did not file a response.
Because we lack jurisdiction to consider Henry's appeal, we dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).