Catarino Jose Castillo v. the State of Texas
This text of Catarino Jose Castillo v. the State of Texas (Catarino Jose Castillo v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-21-00191-CR
CATARINO JOSE CASTILLO, Appellant v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
From the 85th District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 08-02613-CRF-85
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Catarino Castillo was convicted of aggravated assault on a public servant, evading
arrest with a vehicle, and possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver (one
gram or more but less than four grams). See Castillo v. State, No. 10-09-00286-CR, 2011
WL 5221238, at *1 (Tex. App.—Waco Oct. 26, 2011, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated
for publication). Castillo appealed his conviction, and we affirmed the trial court’s
judgment on October 26, 2011. Id. at *1, 12. Castillo, acting pro se, then filed a motion for new trial on July 6, 2021. On July 7,
2021, the trial court signed an order dismissing the motion for new trial for want of
jurisdiction. Castillo now appeals from the trial court’s order.
Generally, a criminal defendant may only appeal from a final judgment. State v.
Sellers, 790 S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990). An order dismissing a motion for
new trial is not a separately appealable order. See Hernandez v. State, No. 03-11-00673-CR,
2012 WL 254606, at *2–3 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op., not
designated for publication) (order denying motion for new trial is not separately
appealable order); Billiot v. State, No. 02-11-00298-CR, 2011 WL 4469232, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Fort Worth Aug. 30, 2011, pet. ref’d) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for
publication) (no statutory authorization for direct appeal from denial of motion for new
trial independent of direct appeal from underlying conviction).
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P.
43.2(f).
MATT JOHNSON Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Johnson, and Justice Smith Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed September 22, 2021 Do not publish [CR25]
Castillo v. State Page 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Catarino Jose Castillo v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/catarino-jose-castillo-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2021.