Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Albert Dawson, Jr. v. The State of Texas
Date: 06-05-2016
Case Number: 10-16-00165-CR
Judge: Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Court: COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
Plaintiff's Attorney: Hon. Mark Skurka
Defendant's Attorney: Donald B. Edwards
enters an appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal which
complies with the requirements of Rule 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with
jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). If an appeal
is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits
of the appeal. Id. Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss
the appeal. Id.
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, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex. 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.
Our review of the documents before the Court and our contact with the trial court
clerk indicates that appellant’s case is still pending in the trial court and the trial court has
not entered an appealable order. We note that appellant has a separate pending appeal
in cause number 13-16-00242-CR arising from trial court cause number 16-CR1376-C in
the 94th District Court of Nueces County. Accordingly, on April 29, 2016, 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 notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant failed to respond to the Court’s notice.
About This Case
What was the outcome of Albert Dawson, Jr. v. The State of Texas?
The outcome was: The Court, having examined and fully considered this matter, is of the opinion that there is not an appealable order and this Court lacks jurisdiction over the matters herein. Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. All pending motions, if any, are DISMISSED as moot.
Which court heard Albert Dawson, Jr. v. The State of Texas?
This case was heard in COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG, TX. The presiding judge was Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam.
Who were the attorneys in Albert Dawson, Jr. v. The State of Texas?
Plaintiff's attorney: Hon. Mark Skurka. Defendant's attorney: Donald B. Edwards.
When was Albert Dawson, Jr. v. The State of Texas decided?
This case was decided on June 5, 2016.