Opinion · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Martinez v. State
Martinez v. State, No. 611-91, UP2451936 (Tex. Crim. App. Mar. 25, 1992)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- Jurisdiction
- Texas
- Date
- 1992-03-25
- Topic
- general
holding that an appeal challenging the denial of a pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus becomes moot when the appellant is convicted of the underlying offense | holding that appeal challenging denial of pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus becomes moot when appellant is convicted of underlying offense and no longer subject to pretrial confinement | holding that appeal challenging denial of pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus becomes moot when appellant is convicted of underlying offense and no longer subject to pretrial confinement | holding that appeal of denial of pretrial bond is rendered moot by defendant’s conviction | holding that an appeal challenging the denial of a pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus becomes moot when the appellant is convicted of the underlying offense before the appellate court rules on the writ | concluding habeas relief regarding pre-trial confinement was moot, where applicant was also convicted of underlying offense and no longer subject to pre-trial confinement | concluding habeas petition rendered moot where applicant had been convicted of the underlying offense and no longer subject to pretrial confinement | holding that conviction rendered moot a complaint regarding pretrial bail | holding that conviction rendered moot a complaint regarding pretrial bail | dismissing as moot a petition for discretionary review concerning pretrial release when the defendant was convicted of the underlying offense and was no longer subject to pretrial 04-20-00259-CR confinement | dismissing petition for discretionary review where the applicant’s habeas petition was moot | dismissing petition for discretionary review where the applicant’s habeas petition was moot | dismissing petition for discretionary review after concluding that denial of applicant’s pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus was rendered moot when applicant had been convicted of underlying offense and was no longer subject to pretrial confinement | court would not address merits of petition complaining about pretrial detention when appellant had been convicted of underlying offense rendering the petition moot | “Applicant has been convicted of the underlying offense and is no longer subject to pre-trial confinement. Therefore, applicant’s petition is moot and we will not address the merits of his petition.” | “Applicant has been convicted of the underlying offense and is no longer subject to pre-trial confinement. Therefore, applicant’s petition is moot[,] and we will not address the merits of his petition.” (internal citation omitted) | an appeal challenging the denial of a pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus is rendered moot when the appellant is convicted of the underlying offense before the appellate court rules on the writ | “Applicant has been convicted of the underlying offense and is no longer subject to pre-trial confinement. Therefore, applicant’s petition is moot[,] and we will not address the merits of his petition.” (internal citation omitted) | appeal of denial of pretrial bond rendered moot by defendant’s conviction
Citator
- Cited by
- 54 opinions
OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
BAIRD, Judge.Applicant was originally charged with capital murder but subsequently indicted for murder. Applicant filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus in the trial court seeking release from jail. Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann. art. 17.151. The trial judge ordered applicant released on a $10,000.00 personal bond. However, before applicant was released, the State charged applicant with aggravated robbery with bail set at $30,000.00. It is undisputed that the alleged aggravated robbery arose from the same transaction as that alleged in applicant’s murder indictment. Applicant filed a second application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to art. 17.151. The trial judge denied relief and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Martinez v. State, 810 S.W.2d 428, 430 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist] 1991).
We granted applicant’s petition for discretionary review wherein he contends the State violated art. 17.151 by charging applicant with aggravated robbery, thereby effectively preventing his release from jail. Applicant has been convicted of the underlying offense and is no longer subject to pre-trial confinement. Therefore, applicant’s petition is moot and we will not address the merits of his petition. See, Danziger v. State, 786 S.W.2d 723 (Tex.Cr.App.1990). Accordingly, appellant’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed. 1
. Our decision today is not to be taken as constituting approval or disapproval of the Court of Appeals opinion,