NUMBER 13-17-00479-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
VICTOR PRIETO AZAMAR, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 430th District Court
of Hidalgo County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Longoria
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides
Appellant, Victor Prieto Azamar, proceeding pro se, attempts to appeal from an
order issued in trial court cause number CR-1380-13-J(1) in the 430th District Court of
Hidalgo County, Texas. On August 28, 2017, appellant filed a notice of appeal seeking
to challenge the trial court’s denial of a motion for new trial. We dismiss this appeal for
lack of jurisdiction.
On August 22, 2013, appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault. This
Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment in a memorandum opinion issued on May 21,
2015, in cause number 13-13-00488-CR. Appellant filed a post-conviction application
for habeas corpus with the trial court pursuant to article 11.07 of the Texas Code of
Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West, Westlaw through
Ch. 49 2017 R.S.). The trial court made findings of fact, conclusions of law, and
recommended denying habeas corpus relief. The Court of Criminal Appeals denied
appellant’s application for writ of habeas corpus on May 17, 2017. Ex parte Azamar, No.
WR-86,699-01 (Tex. Crim. App. May 17, 2017).
On September 5, 2017, 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.
An appellate court has the obligation to determine its own jurisdiction. See
Ramirez v. State, 89 S.W.3d 222, 225 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2002, no pet.);
Yarbrough v. State, 57 S.W.3d 611, 615 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2001, pet. ref'd); see
also Laureles v. State, No. 13-13-00535-CR, 2014 WL 1669102, at *1 (Tex. App.—
Corpus Christi Apr. 24, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). A
defendant's notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the trial court enters an
appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1).
2
This Court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second appeal from appellant’s final
conviction. The exclusive post-conviction remedy in final felony convictions in Texas
courts is through a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure
11.07. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West, Westlaw through Ch. 49 2017 R.S.)
(providing that “[a]fter conviction, the procedure outlined in this Act shall be exclusive and
any other proceeding shall be void and of no force and effect in discharging the prisoner”);
Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S. W.2d 241 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).
GINA M. BENAVIDES,
Justice
Do not publish.
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed the
26th day of October, 2017.
3
Victor Prieto Azamar v. State
Combined Opinion