Conrado Tovar Jr. v. The State of Texas Appeal from 275th District Court of Hidalgo County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-19-00422-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG CONRADO TOVAR JR., Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. On appeal from the 275th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Hinojosa and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina Appellant, Conrado Tovar Jr., attempts a second appeal of his February 25, 2019 conviction for murder in trial court cause number CR-4758-17-E. This Court previously issued a memorandum opinion and judgment on August 8, 2019, regarding this trial court cause number in cause number 13-19-00117. 1 On September 4, 2019, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared the Court did not have jurisdiction and requested correction of this defect within ten days or the appeal would be dismissed. Appellant has responded by filing a motion for extension to file brief and motion for clerk’s record. 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, § 5 (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). All pending motions are dismissed as moot. JAIME TIJERINA, Justice Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Delivered and filed this 24th day of October, 2019. 1 This Court dismissed the appeal on a voluntary motion to dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). 2

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.