Dis missed and Opinion Filed March 24, 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05
- 21
- 01107
- CR EX PARTE EDRICK PAUL FULLER On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. WX21
- 93010
- J MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Osborne, and Nowell Opinion by Justice Nowell Edrick Paul Fuller appeals from the trial court’s ruling, reflected only in a docket sheet entry, den y i ng his pretrial application for writ of habeas corpu s asserting the State has violated his right to a speedy trial. Because the re is no written order , we dismiss the appeal. 1 Appellant has the right to appeal the trial court’s habeas decision when the trial court enters an appealable order. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2), 26.2(a). The

1 The current writ appeal, writ cause no. WX21

- 93010

- J, arises from trial court cause no. F20

- 42206

- J, which was dismissed because of a defective indictment

. A second writ appeal, writ cause no. WX21

- 93020

- J, arises from a reindictment of the offense in trial court cause no. F21

- 00491

- J. Writ cause no. WX21

- 93020

- J was als o appealed to this court , and that appeal has been dismissed. See Ex parte Fuller , No. 05

- 21

- 01178

- CR, 2022 WL 304705 (Tex. App.

— Dallas Feb. 2, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).– 2

–

trial court “enters” an appealable order by sign ing a written order. See State v. Sanavongx a y , 4 07 S .W. 3d 252, 259 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (concluding court of appeals has no jurisdiction over State’s appeal until there is signed written order); State ex rel. Sutton v. Bage , 822 S.W.2d 55, 57 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992) (orig. proceeding) (determining that trial court has not entered order justifying appeal until written order is signed ) ; see also Rodarte v. State , 860 S.W.2d 108, 110 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993) ( defendant’s timetable for filing notice of appeal from adverse habeas decision begins when appealable order signed). The clerk’s record, filed on January 6, 2022, does not contain a signed written order documenting the trial court’s ruling on appellant’s habeas application. In his brief, filed March 1, 2022 , appellant acknowledge s that there is no written order in this case. Nevertheless, appellant contends the Court has jurisdiction over this case because , according to appellant, the trial court told him that the docket entry was a sufficient order. The State’s response brief urges the Court to dismiss the appeal for want of a written order. A docket sheet entry does not qualify as a n appealable order sufficient to confer jurisdiction for appellate review

. See State v. Shaw , 4 S.W.3d 875, 878 (Tex. App.

— Dallas 1999, no pet.). Because the trial co urt has not signed and entered an appealable order in the habeas proceeding, appellant’s notice of appeal does not confer jurisdiction upon the Court. See Sanavongx a y , 4 07 S .W.3d at 259; Henderson– 3

–

v. State , 153 S.W.3d 735 , 735

– 36 (T ex. App.

— Dallas 2005, no pet.); Ex parte
Evans , 611 S.W.3d 86, 88 (Tex. App.

— Waco 2020, no pet .)

. F inding no basis for this Court to exercise jurisdiction, we dismiss this appeal. We deny as moot the State’s pending motion seeking to supplement the record on appeal with the reindictment.

211107f.u05 Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2 (b) /Erin A. Nowell/ / ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE– 4

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
EX PARTE EDRICK PAUL FULLER No. 05

- 21

- 01107

- CR On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. WX21

- 93010

- J. Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell. Justices Myers and Osborne participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal.
Judgment entered this 24 th day of March , 2022

.