With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". not considered to be a “final” conviction, an application for writ of habeas corpus filed during the pendency of revocation proceedings would be returnable to the trial court, whose ruling would be reviewable by a court of appeals and, ultimately, subject to a petition for discretionary review to the court of criminal appeals. Nix v. State, 65 S.W.3d 664, 669 (Tex.Crim.App.2001). Because Appellant’s application was a preconviction writ, it is appealable for review to this court. Even though Appellant was also adjudicated guilty, because the code of criminal procedure and the court of criminal appeals allow the trial court’s ruling on Appellant’s writ of habeas corpus to be reviewed by a court of appeals, we will consider the merits of Appellant’s argument. See Kniatt, 157 S.W.3d at 85 (<HOLDING>); Gordon v. State, Nos. 11-02-00182-CR,

A: holding that managing conservator while in texas to seek return of child by writ of habeas corpus may not be served with civil process and is subject to jurisdiction of court in which habeas corpus is pending and only for purpose of prosecuting writ of habeas corpus
B: holding that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to review the weight of evidence 
C: holding that court had jurisdiction to consider appeal from denial of habeas corpus relief even though trial court proceeded to adjudicate appellant guilty before hearing his writ
D: holding that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to review the weight of evidence
C.