Ex Parte: Eric Dean King Appeal from 366th Judicial District Court of Collin County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISMISSED and Opinion Filed December 7, 2021 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00781-CR EX PARTE ERIC DEAN KING On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 366-03461-2020 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Goldstein, and Smith Opinion by Justice Smith Eric Dean King appealed the trial court’s determination to deny his pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus seeking a reinstatement of his pretrial bond. The habeas proceedings arose out of appellant’s indictment in trial court case number 366-84144-2019 for injury to a disabled individual. On October 15, 2021, the State filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. In its motion, the State reported that it had dismissed the underlying case against appellant and he has been released from custody, thus rendering issues regarding his pretrial confinement moot. On the same day, the trial court clerk filed a supplemental clerk’s record containing the State’s motion to dismiss the underlying proceeding and the trial court’s order dismissing the case against appellant. Appellant has not filed a response to the State’s motion. If the premise of a habeas claim is destroyed by subsequent events, the case is rendered moot. Ex parte Huerta, 582 S.W.3d 407, 410 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2018, pet. ref’d). We have no jurisdiction to decide moot controversies and issue advisory opinions. Id. at 411. Habeas is only appropriate when granting the writ would result in the release of the habeas applicant. See Ex parte Hammons, 631 S.W.3d 715, 716 (Tex. Crim. App. 2021). We agree with the State that the dismissal of the charges and release of appellant renders moot the issues regarding his pretrial confinement addressed in this appeal. See Martinez v. State, 826 S.W.2d 620, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (dismissing appeal as moot where applicant was convicted during pendency of appeal); Ex parte Sewell, 495 S.W.3d 54, 55 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, no pet.) (granting State’s motion to dismiss and dismissing appeal of pretrial writ of habeas corpus because State’s dismissal of charge rendered appeal moot); Ex parte Joyner, 367 S.W.3d 737, 738 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2012, no pet.) (habeas appeal rendered moot by appellant’s imprisonment after conviction on unrelated charge); see also Ex parte Davis, No. 12-20-00141-CR, 2020 WL 6164465, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—Tyler Oct. 21. 2020, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (granting State’s motion to dismiss and dismissing –2– pretrial habeas appeal as moot after trial court dismissed charges and released applicant). Accordingly, we grant the State’s motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal. /Craig Smith/ CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 200781F.U05 –3– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT EX PARTE ERIC DEAN KING On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 366-034612020. Opinion delivered by Justice Smith. Justices Molberg and Goldstein participating. No. 05-20-00781-CR Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. Judgment entered December 7, 2021. –4–
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.
