Thomas Leonard v. State ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                    COURT OF APPEALS
    EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    EL PASO, TEXAS
    §
    THOMAS LEONARD,                                §               No. 08-15-00163-CR
    Appellant,                §                 Appeal from the
    §                120th District Court
    THE STATE OF TEXAS                             §             of El Paso County, Texas
    State.                    §               (TC# 20110D02415)
    §
    ORDER
    Appellant has filed a second motion to reconsider the denial of his motion to vacate the
    trial court’s orders of release and detainer resulting in his transfer to the Texas Department of
    Criminal Justice - Institutional Division. The motion to reconsider cites several cases addressing
    the precise issue raised by Appellant. In none of those cases was the issue presented by motion.
    The Court of Criminal Appeals has addressed the issue in the context of a petition for writ of
    habeas corpus. See e.g., Ex parte Rodriguez, 
    597 S.W.2d 771
     (Tex.Crim.App. 1980); Ex parte
    Norvell, 
    528 S.W.2d 129
    , 131 (Tex.Crim.App. 1975). As an intermediate appellate court, the
    Eighth Court of Appeals does not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal cases. The
    Corpus Christi Court of Appeals addressed the Article 42.09 issue in a direct appeal from the
    order setting the appeal bond but it did so while addressing the merits of the appeal. See
    Rodriguez v. State, 
    744 S.W.2d 361
     (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi 1988, no pet.). A court of
    appeals may address matters incident to an appeal by motion, such as extension requests to file
    the record and the briefs, but we unaware of any authority permitting an appellate court to
    consider a motion which seeks to vacate the trial court’s order transferring a prisoner from the
    county jail to the state penitentiary. In our view, this issue is part of the merits of the pending
    appeal related to the appeal bond. Appellant has not asked us to consider his motion as a petition
    for writ of mandamus, but mandamus relief is not available when a party has an adequate remedy
    by appeal. The issue presented by Appellant’s motion can be raised in his brief which is due to
    be filed on September 3, 2015. The Court will take steps to expedite resolution of this appeal
    when Appellant’s brief is filed.
    IT IS SO ORDERED this 24th day of August, 2015.
    PER CURIAM
    Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-15-00163-CR

Filed Date: 8/24/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/28/2016