On October 23, 2007, the trial court refused to rule on Arthur Wayne Trainer's application for writ of habeas corpus. Trainer filed a "Writ of Habeas Corpus Petition Request for Dismissal" in this Court. This Court does not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal cases. We therefore treated the filing as an attempted appeal of the trial court's order. The trial court did not conduct an evidentiary hearing or issue the writ of habeas corpus. We questioned our jurisdiction over the appeal. Trainer filed a response pro se. He contends he has been denied a speedy trial, and he asserts the cause is set for trial on April 7, 2008. He asserts his right to proceed with the application pro se. He has not filed a petition for mandamus asking that we compel the trial court to act on the application. See Tex. R. App. P. 52. No issue of bail is raised. See Tex. R. App. P. 31.

No appeal lies from the refusal to issue a writ of habeas corpus unless the trial court rules on the merits of the application. Ex parte Hargett, 819 S.W.2d 866 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Ex parte Noe, 646 S.W.2d 230 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983). In this case, the trial court did not address the merits of Trainer's application. The trial court did not issue a writ of habeas corpus, nor did the court conduct an evidentiary hearing on the application for the writ. Compare Ex parte Silva, 968 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Ex parte McCullough, 966 S.W.2d 529 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). We hold we have no jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

DAVID GAULTNEY

Justice

Opinion Delivered April 2, 2008

Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.