Ex Parte Avery Cato v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 31, 2024
Docket03-24-00730-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Ex Parte Avery Cato v. the State of Texas (Ex Parte Avery Cato 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
Ex Parte Avery Cato v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-24-00730-CR

Ex parte Avery Cato

FROM THE 453RD DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY NO. CR-23-5794-D-HC-1, THE HONORABLE SHERRI TIBBE, JUDGE PRESIDING

ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant Avery Cato has filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s denial of

his pro se pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus. The clerk’s record filed in this cause

contains no signed written order, only a docket sheet with the November 4, 2024 entry:

“D’s writ of habeas corpus is denied.” See Dewalt v. State, 417 S.W.3d 678, 685 n.32 (Tex.

App.—Austin 2013, pet. ref’d) (recognizing that docket sheet entries do not qualify as

appealable orders); State v. Cox, 235 S.W.3d 283, 285 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2007, no pet.)

(“It is well settled that a docket sheet entry is not an order.”). On December 6, 2024,

we requested that the trial court file a supplemental clerk’s record containing its order

denying appellant’s habeas application. However, the supplemental clerk’s record filed on

December 11, 2024 contained only a copy of the docket sheet.

“A written and signed appealable order is a prerequisite to invoking this Court’s

appellate jurisdiction.” Dewalt, 417 S.W.3d at 685 n.32; see Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1); State v. Rosenbaum, 818 S.W.2d 398, 402 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Ortiz v. State, 299 S.W.3d 930,

933 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2009, no pet.); Cox, 235 S.W.3d at 285. The lack of a signed written

order is curable: we treat the notice of appeal as prematurely filed, abate the appeal, and remand

the case to the trial court for preparation of an appealable order. Dewalt, 417 S.W.3d at 685 n.32

(citing Tex. R. App. P. 27.1(b); State v. Rollins, 4 S.W.3d 453, 454 & n.1 (Tex. App.—Austin

1999, no pet.)).

Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court for entry

of a signed written order on appellant’s application for writ of habeas corpus. See Tex. R. App.

P. 44.4(b) (requiring appellate court to direct trial court to correct remediable error that prevents

proper presentation of appeal). A supplemental clerk’s record containing the signed order shall

be prepared and filed with this Court no later than January 17, 2025. See Tex. R. App. P.

34.5(c)(2).

It is ordered on December 31, 2024.

Before Justices Baker, Smith, and Theofanis

Abated and Remanded

Filed: December 31, 2024

Do Not Publish

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Cox
235 S.W.3d 283 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2007)
Ortiz v. State
299 S.W.3d 930 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2009)
State v. Rollins
4 S.W.3d 453 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)
State v. Rosenbaum
818 S.W.2d 398 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Suzanne Kearns Dewalt v. State
417 S.W.3d 678 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ex Parte Avery Cato v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-avery-cato-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.