Opinion
No. 13-05-00114-CR
Memorandum Opinion Delivered and Filed August 17, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).
On Appeal from the 398th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
Before Justices HINOJOSA, RODRIGUEZ, and GARZA.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Armando Quintana Villanueva, appeals from the trial court's order denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction. Pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor offense of assault on September 6, 2000. The trial court (1) accepted appellant's plea, (2) found him guilty of assault, (3) assessed his punishment at one year confinement in the Hidalgo County Jail and a $1,000 fine, (4) suspended the jail sentence, and (5) placed him on community supervision for two years. On February 29, 2004, appellant was apprehended by federal authorities for illegal entry. Later, on October 24, 2004, appellant filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.072 of the code of criminal procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.072 (Vernon 2005). Appellant asserted that his plea had been involuntarily entered because of the ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Appellant sought to have the September 6, 2000 judgment of conviction set aside and to be discharged from the illegal restraint of the void judgment. The State filed a response to appellant's application. The trial court did not hear evidence or oral argument on the application. The trial court signed an order denying appellant's application for a writ of habeas corpus as frivolous. There is no indication from the record, or the order, that the trial court considered the merits of the application. If the trial court reaches the merits of the habeas corpus application, its ruling is appealable even if it comes in the form of an order refusing to issue the writ. Id. Conversely, an order purporting to deny the relief sought in a habeas corpus application is not appealable if the trial court did not in fact rule on the substantive merits of the applicant's claim. In re Gonzales, 12 S.W.3d 913, 914 (Tex.App.-Austin 2000, pet. ref'd). Although the trial court stated in its order that it was denying the relief requested, it did not rule on the merits of appellant's application. Therefore, the trial court's order is not appealable. This appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.