CourtListener 10302943•VAZQUEZ-BAUTISTA, EX PARTE JUAN ESTEBAN v. the State of Texas
VAZQUEZ-BAUTISTA, EX PARTE JUAN ESTEBAN v. the State of Texas
CourtListener 10302943Texcrimapp11.12.2024
Gesamter Gesetzestext
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NOS. PD-0072-24, PD-0080-24, PD-0121-24 & PD-0127-24
EX PARTE ELLIOT JERZAIN RAMOS-ESTRADA, JUAN ESTEBAN
VAZQUEZ-BAUTISTA, ABRAHAM VASQUEZ-MARQUEZ & JOSE ANTONIO-
SANTIAGO, Appellants
ON STATE’S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
FROM THE SAN ANTONIO COURT OF APPEALS
WEBB COUNTY
Per curiam. YEARY, J., dissented.
OPINION
In each of these cases, Appellant 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 denied relief, Appellant appealed, and the
court of appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling denying relief.1
The State has filed a petition for discretionary review in each case, challenging the
court of appeals’ holding that Appellant’s claim is cognizable in a pretrial habeas
application. The State also argues that in each case the court of appeals erred by ordering
Appellant’s discharge rather than remanding the case for further development of the
record. 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 Appellant 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.
1
Ex parte Ramos-Estrada, No. 04-22-00632-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio December 13,
2023); Ex parte Vazquez-Bautista, 683 S.W.3d 504 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2023); Ex parte
Vasquez-Marquez, No. 04-22-00626-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio December 27, 2023); Ex
parte Antonio-Santiago, No. 04-22-00628-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio December 27, 2023).
DATE DELIVERED: DECEMBER 11, 2024
DO NOT PUBLISH
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.