1

Order filed August 3 , 2021

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 20

- 00772

- CR

____________ EX PARTE DONTE JAVARY JONES

On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial C ourt Cause No. 1691811



### ORDER

The record currently be fore this court does not establish our jurisdiction over this appeal. This attempted appea l is from the denial of an application for writ of habeas corpus. There is no application for writ of habeas corpus in our record

. Because t here are two t rial court cause numbers in our record , the trial court caus e number for the application underlying this appeal cannot be determined for this
court to order a supplemental record.2

The writ o f h abeas corpus in the record states it is for trial court cause
number 169811 and reflects bail was set at $50,000 on the charge of aggravated robbery with a deadly we apon

. T he only appealable order in the record was filed in

t rial court cause numb er 169811 but the order states “ pro bab le cause e stablished ”
and “ bail r educed to $40,000.00 i n cause # 1694054. ”
The reporter ’ s record states it is from a hearing in trial court cause number
1691811. T h at hearing took place on October 27, 2020, and the record reflects the
nature of the c ase at issue was aggravated r obbery. Ho wever, the trial court states
on the record that “ the case that ’ s befor e the Court is Case Num ber 1690454. So that is the case that the Court will be ruling on regarding both probable cause and the request for reas onable bail. ” On the record, t he trial cou rt found probable cause
had be e n established and “ set bail for this case at $40,000. ” The notice of appeal
states it is from the denial of relief sought in a hearing held Oc tob er 27, 2020

. However, o n the notice of appeal and the request for findings of fa ct and
conclusions of law the number 1690454 is replaced by 169 1 811 . T here is a n affidavit from the deputy clerk stat ing the notice of appeal should have been filed
in cause number 1691811.
The briefs filed by appellant and the State indicate there are th ree other

co unts, none of which have been appealed to this court , but they do not address or clarify the situation , which is :

• T he writ of habeas corpus is filed in 1691811;

• T he appe alable order states bond was set at $40,000 in 1690454 ;

• T he trial court se t bond in 1690454 at the hearing;3

• T he notice of appeal was erroneously filed in 1690454 and “ re

- filed ”
in 1691811 ; and

• The record contains no order s etting bond in 1691811

.
D efects in notices of appeal should not be described as affecting jurisdictio n ,

see Few v. State , 230 S.W.3d 184, 190 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) ; Henry v. State , 331 S.W.3d 552, 554 n. 1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet. ), but from
the state of the record before us it cannot be determine d this is such a case

. Rather,
the record i ndicates we lack jurisdiction over this appeal be cause we have no timely notice of appeal from the order setting bond at $40,000 in 1690454.
The court will consider dismissal of the appeal on its own motion for want of jurisdiction unless appellant files a response on or before Au gust 24, 2021 , showing meritorious grounds for continuing the appeal. The State ’ s reply will be due twenty

- one days after appellant ’s re s ponse, if any, is filed.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justice s Zimmerer and Hassan.