Ex Parte Mohammad Rashid Salim

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 7, 2019
Docket02-19-00009-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Ex Parte Mohammad Rashid Salim (Ex Parte Mohammad Rashid Salim) 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 Mohammad Rashid Salim, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-19-00009-CR No. 02-19-00010-CR ___________________________

EX PARTE MOHAMMAD RASHID SALIM

On Appeal from the 432nd District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 1487220D, 1487226D

Before Pittman, Birdwell, and Bassel, JJ. Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Mohammad Rashid Salim attempts to appeal from the trial court’s

denial of his requested habeas relief. On January 11, 2019, we notified Appellant of

our concern that we lack jurisdiction over these appeals, in part because the trial judge

has not signed a written order in either case denying the requested habeas relief. We

informed Appellant that unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeals filed a

response showing grounds for continuing the appeals by January 22, 2019, we could

dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f), 44.3.

Appellant filed a timely response, but it does not assert that a written order denying

habeas relief now exists. Appellant’s response therefore does not show grounds for

continuing these appeals.

The rules of appellate procedure provide that a criminal defendant has the right

to appeal a judgment of guilt or other appealable order. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

In both cases in the trial court, a signed docket entry dated November 26, 2018 states,

“Writ of Habeas Corpus denied on the record.” But a docket entry, even one signed

by the trial judge, is not an appealable written order. Ex parte Wiley, 949 S.W.2d 3, 4

(Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.); see also Ex parte Fry, No. 07-12-00156-CR,

2012 WL 1694362, at *1–2 (Tex. App.—Amarillo May 15, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.,

not designated for publication) (same).

Consequently, we dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R.

App. P. 43.2(f).

2 Per Curiam

Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: February 7, 2019

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

Related

Ex Parte Wiley
949 S.W.2d 3 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ex Parte Mohammad Rashid Salim, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-mohammad-rashid-salim-texapp-2019.