Devoris Antoine Newson v. the State of Texas

COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
————————————

No. 08-25-00329-CR
————————————

Devoris Antoine Newson, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

On Appeal from the 346th District Court
El Paso County, Texas
Trial Court No. 20240D01344

M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N

Appellant, Devoris Antoine Newson, filed a pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus

on November 7, 2025. Subsequently, Newson filed a notice of appeal stating that he was appealing

“the trial court’s verbal denial of [his] 17.151 Pretrial writ . . ..” We dismiss this attempted appeal

for want of jurisdiction.
In a habeas proceeding, “a trial court’s oral pronouncement is not appealable until a written

order is signed.” Ex parte Perez, No. 14-13-01048-CR, 2014 WL 4416011, at *1 (Tex. App.—

Houston [14th Dist.] Sept. 9, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., not designated for publication);

see State v. Sonavongxay, 407 S.W.3d 252, 258–59 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (holding that a notice

of appeal invokes the appellate court’s jurisdiction “over all parties to the trial court’s judgment or

order appealed from,” that an order must be in writing, and that with no written order from which

to appeal, the court of appeals lacked jurisdiction); State v. Wachtendorf, 475 S.W.3d 895, 904

(Tex. Crim. App. 2015) (“It is true, of course, that the trial court’s oral pronouncements on the

record do not constitute appealable orders.”). A written order is a prerequisite to invoking this

Court’s jurisdiction in a habeas proceeding. See Perez, 2014 WL 4416011, at *1; State v. Nassour,

706 S.W.3d 627, 633 (Tex. App.—Austin 2024, pet. dism’d) (per curiam); Ex parte Wiley, 949

S.W.2d 3, 4 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no writ). The record in this case does not, however,

contain a written order on Newson’s pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus.

Moreover, a pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus is rendered moot when the

applicant is tried on the offense for which the applicant was being held. See Ex parte Tucker, 3

S.W.3d 576 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999) (en banc) (per curiam) (“The appellant have[] been tried

during the pendency of this appeal, the question of his pre-trial bond is moot.”); Danziger v. State,

786 S.W.2d 723, 724 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (en banc) (holding that habeas applicant’s complaint

under Article 17.151 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure had been rendered moot when the

applicant was convicted of the offense for which he was being held); Lopez v. State, 672 S.W.3d

915, 926 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2023, pet. ref’d) (“An appeal from the denial of a

pretrial writ of habeas corpus seeking bail reduction is rendered moot if the defendant is tried and

convicted.”). Here, the record shows that Newson, after filing his pretrial habeas application,

2
entered into a plea bargain agreement with the State, pursuant to which he pleaded guilty and was

sentenced to a term of incarceration by the trial court.

Because no written order appears in the record and because Newson has been tried for and

convicted of the offense for which he was being held, we issued an order on March 6, 2026,

requiring Newson to show cause in writing, by March 26, 2026, why this appeal should not be

dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Despite submitting several filings, Newson has not filed a

response showing that this Court has jurisdiction over this appeal.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss any pending

motions as moot.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

April 24, 2026

Before Palafox and Soto, JJ., Benavides, J. (Senior Judge)
Benavides, J. (Senior Judge), sitting by assignment

(Do Not Publish)

3