Opinion
08-24-00113-CR
05-13-2024
DEVORIS NEWSON, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, State.
Appeal from the 384th District Court of El Paso County, Texas (TC# 20240D01345)
Before Alley, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.
ORDER
Pursuant to Tex.R.App.P. 10.4 (a) the motion ruled on through this Order may have been decided by a single Justice sitting on the panel.
We recently received pro se filings that were docketed with this Court as 08-24-00112-CR and 08-24-00113-CR and which appear to relate to two felony charges that are currently pending against you in El Paso County (#20240D01345 and #20240D01344). Both cases are assigned to the 384th Competency Court for El Paso County, Texas. Our clerk has issued letters in both these cases informing the parties of our intention to dismiss these cases for want of jurisdiction unless this Court is provided with proof of some appealable order or other ground for our jurisdiction.
We have previously received pro se filings from you, which we have already addressed and dismissed. We interpreted one prior document, received on March 13, 2024, as a notice of appeal. The document made references to two magistrate numbers and for that reason we docketed it as two separate appeals. The document referenced claims for violation of civil rights, and your effort to file some sort of pleading in the 120th District Court of El Paso County, Texas. The 120th District Court by correspondence responded that the criminal cases it at one time had pertaining to you had been dismissed and were no longer pending. We sent a request to you asking what order or orders of a lower court you were attempting to appeal from, and when we received no response, we dismissed the attempted appeals. Newson v. State, No. 08-24-00062-CR, 2024 WL 1599207, at *1 (Tex. App.-El Paso Apr. 12, 2024, no pet. h.); Newson v. State, No. 08-24-00061-CR, 2024 WL 1599210, at *1 (Tex. App.-El Paso Apr. 12, 2024, no pet. h.).
This Court has continued to receive additional documents from Mr. Newson with various titles ("Judicial Notice" "Ominbus Motion" "Notice of Appeal" "Additional Claims" "Sworn Declaration"). This order is to clarify (1) how we construe these attempted filings, (2) the manner in which we treat pro se filings when a person is assigned counsel, and (3) how we intend to proceed with attempted filings now and in the future. We address our comments directly to Mr. Newson, but we explain below, all interested parties will receive a copy of this Order.
How we understand the attempted filings with our Court of Appeals
Of the many items you have sent to the Court-each one of which has been read to understand its meaning-the document received on May 2, 2024, appears to best outline the entirety of the present claimed situation. In that document, you describe a recent arrest, an appearance before a jail magistrate, some sort of incident in which it is claimed that a jail officer tried to "murder" you, a trip to the hospital, followed by a second appearance before a jail magistrate on a new charge, and then detention at the jail annex. You complain about the food served to you at the annex, lack of access to a law library, lack of access to records of your hearings, and claim that you have not attended any of several hearings conducted on your cases. And troubling if true, you state that you have had no contact with the public defender who was assigned to your case.
We construe these filings generally as your attempt to complain of the fact of, and the condition of your pretrial confinement related to the charges pending in Cause #20240D01345 and #20240D01344, assigned to the 384th Competency Court for El Paso County, Texas.
As we have explained in our opinions from your prior dismissed cases, this Court is one of limited and defined jurisdiction. Appellate court jurisdiction is authorized by statute. See Galitz v. State, 617 S.W.2d 949, 951 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981) (en banc). In the absence of an authorizing statute, appellate courts are without jurisdiction to consider an appeal. In criminal cases, the Texas Legislature has authorized appeals from final, written judgments and certain interlocutory orders. See Gutierrez v. State, 307 S.W.3d 318, 321 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010).
Nothing in your filings state that you are appealing from a final written judgment of any trial court. Your current complaints all appear to relate to "pre-trial" matters in the cases now pending against you in the trial court. To the extent those matters, if they can be addressed at all, are not properly before our Court in the first instance. For example, you mention an application for a writ of habeas corpus in some of your documents. But this Court does not have original jurisdiction to hear that kind of application-only the trial courts and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals by statute are given that power. Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Ann. art. 11.05 (defining which courts have the authority to issue the writ); In re Brown, No. 08-03-00255-CR, 2003 WL 21401763, at *1 (Tex. App.-El Paso June 16, 2003, no pet.) ("This Court does not have original habeas jurisdiction in criminal matters.). This Court does have jurisdiction to review an order denying or granting an application for a writ of habeas corpus when the trial court either grants or denies the relief requested in the application on its merits. See Ex parte Villanueva, 252 S.W.3d 391, 394 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (recognizing that except as provided by statute, only when "there is a ruling on the merits of the claims may a losing party appeal" from the denial of a writ of habeas corpus). And if properly invoked, this Court also has mandamus jurisdiction to compel a lower court to rule on a properly filed application for habeas corpus. In re Muhammad, No. 08-22-0033-CR, 2022 WL 2207516, at *2 (Tex. App.-El Paso June 21, 2022, no pet.); In re Harris, No. 08-19-00208-CR, 2019 WL 6242315, at *1 (Tex. App.-El Paso Nov. 22, 2019, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
Pro se filings in matters in which a party is represented
Even if you were attempting to file a pretrial writ of habeas corpus, that filing must be pursued "by a court or judge of competent jurisdiction[.]" Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Ann. art. 11.01. Because your case was assigned to the 384th District Court, that is the proper court to first pursue habeas relief. Tex. Code Crim. Pro. Ann. art. 11.08(1) ("If the applicant is accused of committing a felony offense, whether by indictment, information, warrant, arrest, or other means, and has not been convicted of the offense, the applicant or petitioner may apply: (1) to the judge of the court in which the indictment or information charging the applicant is pending[.]"). You would be required to first seek relief from the court in which the indictment is pending, not in this Court. In re Muhammad, No. 08-22-00033-CR, 2022 WL 2207516, at *6 (Tex. App.-El Paso June 21, 2022, no pet.).
And as your filings reflect, a public defender has been assigned to your case. If you wish to pursue pretrial relief as suggested by your filings with this Court, you must consult with your appointed counsel. That attorney would be the individual to advise you on the appropriate pleadings to file, whether habeas corpus or otherwise, through which you may raise the complaints you are attempting to raise. In Texas, there is no absolute right to "hybrid" representation, which means that the trial court does not have to allow you represent yourself on some matters, while your attorney represents you on others. See Scarbrough v. State, 777 S.W.2d 83, 92 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989) (en banc). Therefore, if an accused is represented by counsel, the trial court is free to disregard the accused's pro se filings. Ex parte Bohannan, 350 S.W.3d 116, 116 n.1 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) ("Because applicant is represented by counsel, we disregard his numerous pro se submissions and take no action on them."). This Court has followed that reasoning in any number of cases. Ex parte Muhammad, No. 08-21-00199-CR, 2022 WL 601937, at *2 (Tex. App.-El Paso Mar. 1, 2022, pet. ref'd); In re Hernandez, No. 08-21-00189-CR, 2021 WL 5027791, at *1 (Tex. App.-El Paso Oct. 29, 2021, orig. proceeding); In re Welsh, No. 07-21-00187-CR, 2021 WL 4861287, at *1-2 (Tex. App.-Amarillo Oct. 19, 2021, orig. proceeding).
How we will proceed with your attempted filings
Each of the communications that you have sent to this Court since the dismissal of your last case will be received but not filed in our cause Nos. 08-24-00112-CR and 08-24-00113-CR. As with the prior appeals, you should have received letters from the Court (dated April 25, 2024) stating our intention to dismiss these causes unless you respond by May 19, 2024, and demonstrate our jurisdiction to hear your attempted appeals.
We will serve a copy of this Order on the Judge of the 384th court where your current charges are pending. We do so to let that court know that there is no pending matter before this Court that would require it to stay the proceedings now pending before that court. We expect that court to proceed as it would with any other case before it.
We will also serve a copy of this Order on Bill Hicks, El Paso County District Attorney, because when this Court issues orders that pertain to pending litigation, we serve all the parties, and the matters you complain of pertain to pending charges in the 384th District Court being prosecuted by that office. Finally, we will serve a copy of this Order on Kelli Childress, Chief Public Defender for El Paso County, so she will be made aware of the concerns you raise.
Finally, pursuant to our inherent authority, the Clerk of this Court will no longer file your documents or create a new proceeding listing you as the appellant/relator/petitioner/applicant, unless the Chief Justice of this Court or the designee of the Chief Justice of this Court has reviewed it and determined that it at least arguably invokes the jurisdiction of this Court. Otherwise, your filings will be received only and stored with Cause Nos. 08-24-00112-CR and 08-24-00113-CR.
IT IS SO ORDERED