Court Opinion

ID: 2926949
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 22:43:02.572266+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:29.155774
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-08-00588-CV

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
______________________________________________________________

JESUS MENDOZA,                                                              Appellant,

                                           v.

JUSTICE OF THE PEACE ISMAEL "MELO" OCHOA,            Appellee.
_____________________________________________________________

             On Appeal from the 398th District Court
                    of Hidalgo County, Texas.
______________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

           Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Vela
                     Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

      Appellant, Jesus Mendoza, attempts to appeal an order denying appellant’s petition

to remove from office Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3, Place 2, Ismael Ochoa, entered on

June 26, 2008. On December 23, 2008, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant it did not
appear that this Court has jurisdiction and that the appeal was subject to dismissal, unless

within ten days from the date of receipt of this letter, appellant corrected the defect.

       The appellant responded on January 5, 2009, filing a “Motion to Proceed on this

Appeal.” The appellant asserts that this Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal of a denial

of a petition for citation to remove a judge from office where concrete, specific, and

conclusive evidence supports the claim that the trial judge engaged in judicial misconduct.

       This Court does not have jurisdiction. An appeal may not be taken from a dismissal

of a petition to remove an elected judge where the trial court refused to issue citation. See

TEX . LOC . GOV’T CODE ANN . §87.016 (Vernon 1999). Accordingly, appellant’s motion to

proceed is DENIED and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF

JURISDICTION. See TEX . R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

                                                  PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered
and filed this the 21st day of May, 2009.

                                             2