NUMBER 13-12-00350-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
EX PARTE CHRISTOPHER CARTER
____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 130th District Court
of Matagorda County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Vela
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Christopher Carter, filed a pro se notice of appeal seeking to challenge
an order denying a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus. On May 24, 2012, the Clerk of
this Court notified appellant that it appeared that the order from which the appeal was
taken was not an appealable order, and requested correction of this defect within ten
days or the appeal would be dismissed. On June 7, 2012, appellant responded stating
the Court has jurisdiction. Counsel for appellant filed a motion to withdraw and this Court
abated and remanded this cause to the trial court.
The trial court made findings that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, was
not denied effective assistance of counsel, and is indigent. The trial court appointed
Mary Peter Cudd to represent appellant on appeal and further found that the plea
admonishments and judicial confession made appellant fully aware of the consequences
of agreeing to waive any right to appeal the case. On September 27, 2012, the Clerk of
this Court again notified appellant that it appeared that the order from which the appeal
was taken was not an appealable order, and requested correction of this defect within ten
days or the appeal would be dismissed.
On October 18, 2012, counsel filed a response with this Court. Counsel=s
response advises that she has filed a “Notice of Appeal Pending Ruling on Request for
Permission to Appeal From Trial Court and Ruling by the Court of Criminal Appeals in
WR-77, 647-01 and 02.” The motion requests the trial court grant permission to appeal.
The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be
dismissed if the trial court=s certification does not show that the defendant has the right of
appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Appellant has not
been granted a right to appeal. Additionally, jurisdiction to grant post-conviction habeas
corpus relief in felony cases rests exclusively with the Texas Court of Criminal
Appeals. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 5 (West Supp. 2011); Bd. of Pardons
& Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483
(Tex. Crim. App. 1995); In re McAfee, 53 S.W .3d 715, 717–18 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st
Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding). Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed the 1st
day of November, 2012.
2