Opinion
04-23-01047-CR
02-07-2024
EX PARTE Jose Santos OCHOA NAJERA
DO NOT PUBLISH
From the County Court, Maverick County, Texas Trial Court No. 30911 Honorable Susan D. Reed, Judge Presiding
Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice, Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice, Irene Rios, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION
Appellant, Jose Santos Ochoa Najera, appeals from the denial of his pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Background
On March 2, 2023, Ochoa Najera filed an application for writ of habeas corpus. On March 28, 2023, the trial court issued an order stating, "the Application is denied without issuing writ." Ochoa Najera timely filed a notice of appeal.
For reasons that do not appear in the record, the notice of appeal was not filed in this court until December 1, 2023.
On December 4, 2023, the trial court issued a second order, granting Ochoa Najera's application for writ and ordering that "the merits will be heard by submission of evidence."
On December 11, 2023, we issued an order notifying Ochoa Najera that it appears we lack jurisdiction over this appeal and that we would dismiss this appeal unless he filed a response to our order showing that we have jurisdiction. Ochoa Najera filed a response on December 19, 2023, stating that he "believes this appeal is now moot."
Analysis
There is no right to an appeal when a trial court refuses to issue a habeas writ or dismisses or denies a habeas application without ruling on the merits of the applicant's claims. See Ex parte Villanueva, 252 S.W.3d 391, 394, 395 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Purchase v. State, 176 S.W.3d 406, 407 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.).
We have previously held, in an opinion denying a petition for writ of mandamus filed by Ochoa Najera related to his habeas application, that the trial court did not rule on the merits of his habeas application in its March 28, 2023 order. Ex parte Ochoa Najera, No. 04-23-00302-CR, 2023 WL 5418325, at *1-2 (Tex. App.-San Antonio Aug. 23, 2023, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication); see In re United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 521 S.W.3d 920, 928 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, orig. proceeding) ("If the appellate court resolves a question of law in a mandamus proceeding, that merits determination is the law of the case."). Moreover, an examination of the record in this case, including both the trial court's March 28, 2023 order and its December 4, 2023 order, shows that the trial court did not rule on the merits of Ochoa Najera's habeas application in its March 28, 2023 order.
Because the trial court did not rule on the merits of Ochoa Najera's habeas application, we lack jurisdiction to review his appeal. See Villanueva, 252 S.W.3d at 394; Purchase, 176 S.W.3d at 407; Ex parte Miller, 931 S.W.2d 724, 725 (Tex. App.-Austin 1996, no pet.).
Conclusion
We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.