Ex Parte John Davis Campbell

Full text

Opinion issued June 23, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-15-00883-CR NO. 01-15-00884-CR ——————————— EX PARTE JOHN DAVIS CAMPBELL, Appellant

On Appeal from the 10th District Court Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Case Nos. 15-CR-0665 & 15-CR-0666

MEMORANDUM OPINION

John Davis Campbell appeals from the trial court’s order denying a pre-trial application for writ of habeas corpus due to delay. Because Campbell has been convicted in both cases, his appeals are moot. We therefore dismiss the appeals.

— 2 —

Background

Campbell was arrested and charged with one count of driving while intoxicated, third or greater offense (trial court cause number 15-CR-0665),1 and one count of possession of methamphetamine in an amount greater than one ounce and less than four ounces (trial court cause number 15-CR-0666).2 The State was not ready for trial within ninety days of the commencement of Campbell’s detention, as required by Article 17.151 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 17.151, § 1(1) (West Supp. 2015). Campbell therefore applied for a writ of habeas corpus in each case, seeking his release because of delay. See id. The trial court denied the application for habeas corpus, and Campbell timely appealed. See Pharris v. State, 196 S.W.3d 369, 372 n.4 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.) (criminal defendant may bring interlocutory appeal of denial of writ of habeas corpus). A jury subsequently found Campbell guilty of both charges, and the trial court entered judgments of conviction.

1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 49.04 (defining offense of driving while intoxicated), 49.09(b)(2) (enhancing classification of offense to felony of third degree if defendant “has previously been convicted . . . two times of any offense relating to the operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated) (West 2015). 2 See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. §§ 481.102(6) (listing methamphetamine as Penalty Group 1 controlled substance), 481.115(c) (possession of more than one gram but less than four grams of controlled substance in Penalty Group 1 constitutes felony of third degree) (West 2010).

— 3 —

Mootness

When a defendant appeals from the denial of a pre-trial application for writ of habeas corpus under Article 17.151 and is subsequently convicted, the appeal is moot. Martinez v. State, 826 S.W.2d 620, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992); Danziger v. State, 786 S.W.2d 723, 724 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990); see also Ex parte Morgan, 335 S.W.2d 766, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960) (appeal from denial of pre-trial bail mooted by subsequent conviction). Because Campbell was convicted on both charges at issue in these appeals and is no longer subject to pre-trial confinement, the appeals are moot.

Conclusion

We dismiss the appeals as moot.

Russell Lloyd Justice

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Lloyd. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).