Opinion
No. 11-12-00327-CV
11-08-2012
CRANSTON LAMONT PARKS, Appellant v. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 70th District Court
Ector County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. A-27,718
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Cranston Lamont Parks has filed a pro se notice of appeal from a "VOID ORDER TO WITHDRAW INMATE FUNDS FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF ATTORNEY FEES." Upon reviewing the documents filed in this court, we wrote appellant and informed him that it did not appear that a final, appealable order had been entered. We requested that appellant respond and show grounds to continue this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3. Appellant has responded to our letter, but his response does not show grounds to continue this appeal. He asserts that he filed an objection relating to the order to withdraw funds in the trial court but that he has not heard anything from the trial court.
Unless specifically authorized by statute, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Tex. A & M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu, 233 S.W.3d 835, 840-41 (Tex. 2007); Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191 (Tex. 2001). A notice or order to withdraw funds is not a final, appealable order. See Harrell v. State, 286 S.W.3d 315, 316 n.1, 321 (Tex. 2009) ("withdrawal order" is actually a notification from the court, not an order); Ramirez v. State, 318 S.W.3d 906 (Tex. App.—Waco 2010, no pet.). The documents on file in this court show that the trial court has not acted on any post-notification motion, such as a motion to strike the order to withdraw inmate funds. It has been held that an order ruling on such a motion is appealable. See Harrell, 286 S.W.3d 315. No appealable order has been entered in this case.
Consequently, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,
McCall, J., and Gray, C.J., 10th Court of Appeals.
Tom Gray, Chief Justice, Court of Appeals, 10th District of Texas at Waco, sitting by assignment to the 11th Court of Appeals.