CourtListener 10302942•VELAZQUEZ-CRUZ, EX PARTE GUSTAVO v. the State of Texas
VELAZQUEZ-CRUZ, EX PARTE GUSTAVO v. the State of Texas
CourtListener 10302942TexcrimappDec 11, 2024
Full text
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NOS. PD-0726-23, PD-0739-23, PD-0771-23,
PD-0779-23, PD-0793-23 & PD-0900-23
EX PARTE JOSUE ISAY DEL CAMPO-CHAVEZ, JUAN LUIS BALTAZAR-
PEREZ, ALDO GALINDO-ZAMORA, GUSTAVO VELAZQUEZ-CRUZ,
PERFECTO TREJO-RUBIO & IVAN GALINDO-CHAVEZ, Appellees
ON STATE’S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
FROM THE SAN ANTONIO COURT OF APPEALS
ZAPATA COUNTY
Per curiam. YEARY, J., dissented.
OPINION
In each of these cases, Appellee was arrested for trespassing on private property.
See TEX. PENAL CODE § 30.05(a). He filed a pretrial application for a writ of habeas
corpus, arguing that the State was selectively prosecuting him in violation of his equal
protection rights. In each case, the trial court granted relief, the State appealed, and the
court of appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling granting relief.1
1
Ex parte Del Campo-Chavez, 674 S.W.3d 714 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2023);
Ex parte Baltazar-Perez, No. 04-22-00740-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio August 30,
The State has filed a petition for discretionary review in each case, challenging the
court of appeals’ holding that Appellee’s claim is cognizable in a pretrial habeas
application. We recently handed down our opinion in Ex parte Aparicio, No. PD-0461-
23, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tex. Crim. App. October 9, 2024), in which we held that Aparicio’s
selective prosecution claim was cognizable in a pretrial habeas application. We also held
that Aparicio did not make a prima facie showing that he was arrested and prosecuted
because of his gender.
Consistent with our opinion in Aparicio, we grant review on our own motion of the
following ground in each case:
Did Appellee make a prima facie showing that he was arrested and prosecuted
because of his gender?
Accordingly, in each case, we vacate the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the
case to that court in light of our opinion in Aparicio. The State’s petitions are refused. No
motions for rehearing will be entertained, and the Clerk is instructed to immediately issue
mandate.
DATE DELIVERED: DECEMBER 11, 2024
DO NOT PUBLISH
2023); Ex parte Galindo-Zamora, No. 04-22-00739-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio
September 27, 2023); Ex parte Velazquez-Cruz, No. 04-22-00742-CR (Tex. App.—San
Antonio September 13, 2023); Ex parte Trejo-Rubio, No. 04-22-00741-CR (Tex.
App.—San Antonio September 27, 2023); Ex parte Galindo-Chavez, No.
04-22-00738-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio October 4, 2023).
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.