Cedric Bernard Walton v. State

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-15-00330-CR

Cedric Bernard Walton, Appellant v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MILAM COUNTY, 20TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 19,014, HONORABLE JOHN YOUNGBLOOD, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Cedric Bernard Walton filed a notice of appeal attempting to challenge the district court’s April 20, 2015 post-judgment order denying his “Motion for Judgment to Correct Clerical Mistake (Nunc Pro Tunc)” in which he sought jail-time credit on his sentence. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 42.03, § 2(a).

We do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders in a criminal appeal unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); see Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (standard for determining jurisdiction is not whether appeal is precluded by law but whether appeal is authorized by law). There is no such grant for this appeal from the district court’s post-judgment order denying a time-credit motion. See Abbott, 271 S.W.3d at 696-97; see also Suarez v. State, No. 03-14-00477-CR, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 10635, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Sept. 25, 2014,

2

no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (dismissing appeal for want of jurisdiction because order denying motion for judgment nunc pro tunc was not appealable).

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App.

P. 43.2(f).

Jeff Rose, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Field Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction Filed: July 24, 2015 Do Not Publish