Opinion
NUMBER 13-11-00714-CV
03-29-2012
KENNETH HICKMAN-BEY, Appellant, v. TEXAS BOARD OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, ET AL., Appellees.
On appeal from the 36th District Court
of Bee County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Benavides, Vela, and Perkes
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Kenneth Hickman-Bey, attempted to perfect an appeal from the trial court's order denying his motion for a nunc pro tunc for out of time appeal in trial court cause number B-10-1416-0-CV-A. Because this denial is not an appealable order, we dismiss for want of jurisdiction.
Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that the order from which this appeal was taken was not an appealable order. On December 13, 2011, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court's letter, the appeal would be dismissed. In response, appellant filed a motion to retain appeal and a motion for judicial notice. Appellant states that the reporter's record demonstrates that the trial court granted an out of time appeal.
In terms of appellate jurisdiction, appellate courts only have jurisdiction to review final judgments and certain interlocutory orders identified by statute. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). See Shadowbrook Apartments v. Abu-Ahmad, 783 S.W.2d 210, 211 (Tex. 1990) (holding that order denying motion for judgment nunc pro tunc is not appealable).
The Court, having fully reviewed and considered the documents herein, concludes that the order appealed from fails to invoke our appellate jurisdiction and is of the opinion that the cause should be dismissed. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Any other pending motions are likewise DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM