CURIPOMA, JESUS ALBERTO GUZMAN v. the State of Texas

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. PD-0159-22

Ex parte JESUS ALBERTO GUZMAN CURIPOMA, Appellee

ON PETITION FROM THE KINNEY COUNTY ATTORNEY
AND ON COURT’S OWN MOTION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
FROM THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
TRAVIS COUNTY

PER CURIAM. YEARY, J., filed a concurring opinion. SLAUGHTER, J., filed
a concurring opinion in which RICHARDSON, NEWELL and WALKER, JJ., joined.
KELLER, P.J., filed a dissenting opinion in which HERVEY and KEEL, JJ., joined.

OPINION

This case arises from a prosecution in which Appellee was arrested in Kinney County. He

attempted to challenge the prosecution by filing a habeas application in Travis County District Court.

The Travis County District Court granted relief, and the Kinney County Attorney filed a notice of

appeal. Concluding that the Kinney County Attorney was not authorized to appeal on the State’s

behalf, the court of appeals dismissed the appeal.1 In its reasoning, the court of appeals held that

1
State v. Curipoma, 652 S.W.3d 74, 80 (Tex. App.—Austin 2022).
CURIPOMA — 2

Appellee’s habeas action was properly filed in the Travis County District Court.2 In In re Smith, we

held that, for a case like this originating in Kinney County, proceedings in the Travis County court

are unauthorized.3 We vacate the court of appeals’s decision and remand for reconsideration in light

of Smith.

Delivered: June 26, 2024
Publish

2
Id. at 77-78.
3
665 S.W.3d 449 (Tex. Crim. App. 2022).