Court Opinion

ID: 4095210
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-11-03 14:26:52.757122+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:08:26.876280
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-16-00517-CR

                              COURT OF APPEALS

                    THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                       CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

STEVEN PEREZ,                                                                  Appellant,

                                             v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                 Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 117th District Court
                   of Nueces County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

                Before Justices Garza, Perkes, and Longoria
                     Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

       Appellant, Steven Perez, proceeding pro se, attempts to appeal an “order

dismissing his petition for writ of audita querela.” On September 30, 2016, the Clerk of

this Court notified appellant that it appeared there was no final, appealable judgment, that

the writ of audita querela is not available in Texas, and requested correction of this defect

within ten days or the appeal would be dismissed. Appellant has responded that he is
filing his notice of appeal prematurely and that relief is available by writ of audita querela.

We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

       An appellate court has the obligation to determine its own jurisdiction.           See

Ramirez v. State, 89 S.W.3d 222, 225 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2002, no pet.);

Yarbrough v. State, 57 S.W.3d 611, 615 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2001, pet. ref'd); see

also Laureles v. State, No. 13-13-00535-CR, 2014 WL 1669102, at *1 (Tex. App.—

Corpus Christi Apr. 24, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). A

defendant's notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the trial court enters an

appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal which complies

with the requirements of Rule 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction.

Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). If an appeal is not timely

perfected, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the

appeal. Id. Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the

appeal. Id.

       The Court, having examined and fully considered the notice of appeal and

response filed by appellant, is of the opinion appellant’s appeal is premature.             An

appealable order has not been entered by the trial court and this Court lacks jurisdiction

over the matters herein. Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

                                                                 PER CURIAM

Do not publish.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the
3rd day of November, 2016.

                                              2