Catarino Jose Castillo v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 22, 2021
Docket10-21-00191-CR
StatusPublished

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.

Bluebook
Catarino Jose Castillo v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

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

State v. Sellers
790 S.W.2d 316 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
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.