Court Opinion

ID: 6113874
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-31 08:14:29.04419+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:19:42.362534
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-21-00292-CR

                             COURT OF APPEALS

                   THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

                       EX PARTE D.A.G.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 357th District Court
                  of Cameron County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION
                Before Justices Hinojosa, Tijerina, and Silva
                 Memorandum Opinion by Justice Tijerina
      Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appears there is no final,

appealable order. On September 10, 2021, we received appellant’s notice attempting to

appeal a writ of habeas corpus and/or writ for bond reduction. On September 14, 2021

and October 15, 2021, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant it appeared there was no

final, appealable order and if the defect was not corrected within thirty days, the appeal

may be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.1. On

December 1, 2021, the Clerk of the Court sent a third notice to appellant’s counsel.

Appellant has neither corrected the defect nor responded to the Court’s notice.
        Generally, a state appellate court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a

criminal defendant where there has been a final judgment of conviction. Workman v.

State, 170 Tex. Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d

160, 161 (Tex. App.–Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). Exceptions to the general rule include: (1)

certain appeals while on deferred adjudication community supervision, Kirk v. State, 942

S.W.2d 624, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); (2) appeals from the denial of a motion to reduce

bond, TEX. R. APP. P. 31.1; McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161; and (3) certain appeals from the

denial of habeas corpus relief, Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.--Dallas

1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. Additionally, the notice of appeal cannot be

construed as premature because it was filed before the trial court has made a finding of

guilt or has received a jury verdict. See TEX. R. APP. P. 27.1(b).

        Due to appellant’s failure to cure the defect and failure to respond to the Clerk of

the Court’s notice, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P.

37.1.

                                                                      JAIME TIJERINA
                                                                      Justice

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

Delivered and filed on the
27th day of January, 2022.

                                             2