in Re: Charles Ross

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided August 18, 2010·No. 12-09-00317-CV·Published

Opinion

NO. 12-09-00317-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS ' APPEAL FROM THE 114TH IN RE: CHARLES ROSS, APPELLANT ' JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

' SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION We withdraw our memorandum opinion and judgment of March 20, 2010, and issue this substitute memorandum opinion and accompanying judgment in its place. See TEX. R. APP. P. 19.3(a) (permitting court, after expiration of plenary power, to correct clerical error in opinion and judgment). Appellant Charles Ross filed a document in the trial court entitled “Petition for Smith County District Judge Determination for Probable Cause to Court of Inquiry or Convening Special Grand Jury.” By written order signed on August 5, 2009, the trial court denied the relief sought and dismissed the cause. Ross filed a notice of appeal from the order. On January 26, 2010, this court notified Ross that the district clerk’s record received in this appeal does not include a final judgment or other appealable order. See In re Court of Inquiry, 148 S.W.3d 554, 555 (Tex. App.–El Paso 2004, no pet.) (no appeal from district judge’s determination under Chapter 52 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure). Therefore, the record does not show that this court has jurisdiction of the appeal. Ross was further notified that his appeal would be dismissed if the information received in the appeal was not amended on or before February 25, 2010 to show the jurisdiction of this court. On February 3, 2010, we received a copy of a letter Ross sent to the district clerk requesting that the trial court be asked to prepare and sign a final judgment to be included in the appellate record. Along with the copy of the letter, we received a copy of a “Motion for Final Judgment,” which had been sent to the district clerk for filing. However, we have not received a final judgment or other appealable order in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.2, 42.3. Opinion delivered August 18, 2010. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)

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

in Re: Charles Ross, (Tex. Ct. App. 2010).

in Re: Charles Ross (in Re: Charles Ross) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Court of Inquiry
148 S.W.3d 554 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)