Ex Parte Justin Scott Meads ( 2014 )

IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-14-00254-CR
EX PARTE JUSTIN SCOTT MEADS,
Appellant
From the County Court at Law No 1
Brazos County, Texas
Trial Court No. 14-00160-CRM-CCL1
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Justin Scott Meads appeals the denial of his pretrial writ of habeas corpus.
“Where the premise of a habeas corpus application is destroyed by subsequent
developments, the legal issues raised thereunder are rendered moot.” Hubbard v. State,
841 S.W.2d 33, 33 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1992, no pet.). On October 13, 2014,
the State moved the trial court to dismiss the underlying case because Meads continues
to be incompetent and because he has a “blue warrant for parole violations.” The trial
court dismissed the underlying case.
In the Clerk of the Court’s October 22, 2014 letter, Meads was notified that the
Court would dismiss his appeal because it appears to be moot unless, within twenty-
one days after the date of the letter, Meads showed grounds for continuing the appeal.
In response, Meads has filed a “Withdrawal of Notice of Appeal” in which he states that
he “respectfully moves this Court to withdraw Defendant’s Notice of Appeal and to
dismiss the appeal, pursuant to Rule 42.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.”1
Rule 42.2(a) requires motions to dismiss in criminal cases to be signed by the appellant
and his or her attorney. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). Meads’s motion to dismiss has been
signed only by his attorney; therefore, we deny the motion. We nevertheless dismiss
this appeal because the legal issues were rendered moot when the trial court dismissed
the underlying case.
REX D. DAVIS
Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Davis, and
Justice Scoggins
Appeal dismissed
Opinion delivered and filed November 20, 2014
Do not publish
[CR25]
1We have no authority under Rule 42.2 to “withdraw Defendant’s Notice of Appeal”; therefore, we will
construe Meads’s motion as a motion to voluntarily dismiss his appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2.
Ex parte Meads Page 2