in Re: Adonis Tarbutton

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 16, 2008
Docket06-08-00002-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in Re: Adonis Tarbutton (in Re: Adonis Tarbutton) 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
in Re: Adonis Tarbutton, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion



In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana



______________________________



No. 06-08-00002-CV



IN RE: ADONIS TARBUTTON





Original Mandamus Proceeding







Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley

MEMORANDUM OPINION



Adonis Tarbutton has petitioned this Court to issue a writ of mandamus compelling Collin County Criminal District Attorney John Roach to provide any exculpatory evidence Roach may have in his possession. We are without jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against a district attorney. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221(b) (Vernon 2004); In re Ruston, No. 05-07-01379-CV, 2007 Tex. App. LEXIS 8726 (Tex. App.--Dallas Nov. 2, 2007, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., released for publication).

We deny Tarbutton's petition.



Bailey C. Moseley

Justice



Date Submitted: January 15, 2008

Date Decided: January 16, 2008



hearing in which he argues that his notice of appeal was timely because he was not sentenced April 11, 2006, but instead was sentenced one month later, on May 11, 2006. Were that the case, his notice of appeal would be timely, and we would have jurisdiction over the appeal.

The record before us indicates otherwise. The only record indications of Falcon's date of sentencing both point to April 11: (1) the judgment which so recites and (2) the docket sheet entry which confirms that date. The judgment states categorically that, on the "11th day of April, 2006

. . . the court proceeded, in the presence of the Defendant and his attorney, to pronounce sentence

. . . ." That judgment was not signed until May 11, 2006. Unlike civil cases, however, as we pointed out in our original opinion, the date on which sentence was imposed is the date on which the appellate timetable began running--not the date on which the judgment was signed, as it is in civil appeals.

We overrule the motion for rehearing.



Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice



Date: October 25, 2006



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

Related

§ 22.221
Texas GV § 22.221(b)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re: Adonis Tarbutton, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-adonis-tarbutton-texapp-2008.