Ex Parte Minnie Salinas A/K/A Bronte Guevara--Appeal from 226th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
Annotate this CaseEX PARTE Minnie SALINAS a/k/a Bronte Guevara
From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 99-CR-1818A
Honorable Sid Harle, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice
Sitting: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice
Tom Rickhoff, Justice
Paul W. Green, Justice
Delivered and Filed: September 29, 1999
AFFIRMED
This is a delayed indictment case. Minnie Salinas ("Salinas") appeals the trial court's order denying habeas relief. Salinas was arrested on August 30, 1993, and she was released on bond on August 31, 1993. The case was rejected by the district attorney in December of 1993, but Salinas was subsequently indicted in February of 1999. The first indictment was dismissed, but Salinas was reindicted in April of 1999. Salinas filed her application for writ of habeas corpus in May of 1999, seeking relief because the State failed to return the indictment during the next grand jury term following her arrest.
On appeal, Salinas contends that the trial court erred in denying habeas relief because the indictment was untimely, and the trial court should not have based its denial on the decision in Brooks v. State, 990 S.W.2d 278, 285 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). Although Salinas presents some interesting challenges to the Brooks decision, we are bound by its holding; that is, "article 32.01 has no application once an indictment is returned." Id.; State v. Bruni, No. 04-98-00908-CR, 1999 WL 436545, at *1 (Tex. App.--San Antonio, June 30, 1999, pet. filed); State v. Weiblen, No. 04-98-00842-CR, 1999 WL 371302, at *2 (Tex. App.--San Antonio, June 9, 1999, pet. filed). In this case, Salinas did not seek relief under article 32.01 until after her indictment was returned. She therefore waived her right to challenge the indictment. The trial court's order is affirmed.
PHIL HARDBERGER,
CHIEF JUSTICE
DO NOT PUBLISH
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.