NUMBERS 13-15-00411-CR, 13-15-00412-CR, AND 13-15-00413-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
RYAN EDWARD BRUSH, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
____________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 156th District Court
of Bee County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Perkes
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Ryan Edward Brush, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal seeking
to challenge an order denying his motion for appointment of counsel to file an application
for a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus. On September 10, 2015, 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. Appellant has failed to respond to the Court’s directive.
A post-conviction writ of habeas corpus applicant is not constitutionally entitled to
appointment of counsel, although counsel may be appointed whenever “the interest of
justice require representation.” Ex parte Graves, 70 S.W.3d 103, 11 (Tex. Crim. App.
2002); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. Art 1.051(d)(3)(West Supp. 2014). Only the judges
of county courts, statutory county courts, and districts courts trying criminal cases in each
county are authorized to appoint counsel for indigent defendants in the county. See id.
Art. 26.04(a), (b)(1).
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 (Vernon 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). Therefore, we are without jurisdiction to grant the requested relief.
The appeals are DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed the
5th day of November, 2015.
2