Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 12-16-2020
Case Style:
Timmy Ray Caldwell v. The State of Texas
Case Number: 02-20-00142-CR
Judge: Per Curiam
Court: Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
Plaintiff's Attorney: Joseph W. Spence
Defendant's Attorney:
OR
Just Call 855-853-4800 for Free Help Finding a Lawyer Help You.
Description:
Fort Worth, Texas - Criminal defense atty represented defendant Timmy Ray Caldwell with appealing from the trial court’s order denying his motion for judgment nunc pro tunc.
We informed Appellant by letter of our concern that we do not have
jurisdiction over his appeal because the order denying his motion does not appear to
be an appealable order, and we stated that his appeal could be dismissed unless he or
any party filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. Appellant filed
a response, but it does not show grounds for continuing the appeal.
An order denying a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc is not appealable.
Castor v. State, 205 S.W.3d 666, 667 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006, no pet.) (“We do not
have appellate jurisdiction of the denial of a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc.”).
The appropriate remedy for the denial of a motion for judgment nunc pro tunc is to
file a petition for writ of mandamus in the court of appeals. Ex parte Florence, 319
S.W.3d 695, 696 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010); Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147, 148–49
(Tex. Crim. App. 2004).
Outcome: We therefore dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: