Beasley v. State

Full title: WILLIE D. BEASLEY, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

Court: COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

Date published: Jun 15, 2016

NO. 12-16-00158-CR (Tex. App. Jun. 15, 2016)

Opinion

NO. 12-16-00158-CR

06-15-2016

WILLIE D. BEASLEY, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

PER CURIAM

APPEAL FROM THE 173RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT HENDERSON COUNTY, TEXASMEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant attempts to appeal from an order denying his motion for appointment of counsel to assist him with his habeas corpus proceedings. As a general rule, an appeal in a criminal case may be taken only from a judgment of conviction. See Workman v. State, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961). However, there are certain narrow exceptions. Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1998, no pet.) (listing exceptions). The order Appellant complains of is not a judgment of conviction nor does it fall within any exception to the general rule. Therefore, this Court does not have jurisdiction over the appeal.

On May 31, 2016, this Court notified Appellant that the information received in this appeal does not include a final judgment or other appealable order and therefore does not show the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.2. Appellant was further notified that the appeal would be dismissed unless the information was amended, on or before June 10, 2016, to show the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3. This deadline has now passed, and Appellant has neither shown the jurisdiction of this Court nor otherwise responded to its May 31, 2016 notice. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Opinion delivered June 15, 2016.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(DO NOT PUBLISH)

JUDGMENT

Appeal from the 173rd District Court of Henderson County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. A-9192)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this court is without jurisdiction of the appeal, and that the appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.

By per curiam opinion.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.