Beatrice Curiel v. the State of Texas
Opinion
NUMBER 13-21-00400-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________
BEATRICE CURIEL, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 214th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Longoria, Hinojosa, and Silva Memorandum Opinion by Justice Hinojosa
Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appears there is no final
appealable order. On November 16, 2021, appellant attempted to appeal cause number
CR13000129-F. On January 7, 2022, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that there
appears to be no final, appealable order. Appellant was further notified that if the defect
is not corrected within thirty days from the date of the letter, the appeal would be
dismissed for want of jurisdiction. On February 9, 2022, after the trial court appointed new counsel for the appellant, the Clerk of the Court again notified appellant that there is no
final, appealable order and was further notified that if the defect is not corrected within
thirty days from the date of the letter, the appeal would be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction. Appellant has not filed a response nor attempted to cure the defect.
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. Crim. App. 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 does not reveal an appealable order
entered by the trial court within thirty days before the filing of appellant’s notice of
appeal. The Court, having examined and fully considered the notice of appeal, 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 want of jurisdiction.
LETICIA HINOJOSA Justice Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Delivered and filed on the 5th day of May, 2022.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Beatrice Curiel v. the State of Texas (Beatrice Curiel v. the State of Texas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.