Opinion
Nos. WR-53,145-09, WR-53,145-10, WR-53,145-11, WR-53,145-12
April 12, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH.
On Applications for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Cause Nos. 97-CR-0080, 98-CR-0037, 98-CR-0525 98-CR-0748, in the 10th District Court, Galveston County.
ORDER
These are applications for a writ of habeas corpus that were transmitted to this Court pursuant to the provisions of Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07. Applicant was convicted of four counts of aggravated sexual assault of a child and sentenced to confinement for eighteen years for each count. Applicant's convictions were affirmed on appeal. Smith v. State, Nos. 14-98-01106-CR, 14-98-01107-CR, 14-98-01108-CR 14-98-01109-CR (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.], delivered November 2, 2000, pet. ref'd). Applicant contends in four separate grounds that the State destroyed biological evidence, that the State failed to disclose evidence, that the trial court improperly denied Applicant's motions for Chapter 64 DNA testing, and that counsel was ineffective in a Chapter 64 appeal. After a review of the record, we find that Applicant's first and second grounds are without merit. They are denied. Applicant's third and fourth grounds are dismissed. Claims involving a Chapter 64 DNA proceeding are not cognizable in an application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Baker, 2006 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 302 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006). Accordingly, Applicant's first and second grounds are denied, and his third and fourth grounds are dismissed.