Joe Jason Ortiz v. State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 7, 2001
Docket04-00-00832-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Joe Jason Ortiz v. State of Texas (Joe Jason Ortiz v. 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
Joe Jason Ortiz v. State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

No. 04-00-00832-CR

Joe ORTIZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 99-CR-4893

Honorable Philip Kazen, Judge Presiding

Per Curiam

Sitting: Tom Rickhoff, Justice

Alma L. López, Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 7, 2001

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Appellant pled nolo contendere to aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Judgment was entered on May 23, 2000, and appellant was sentenced to eight years confinement. Appellant filed a notice of appeal. On November 14, 2000, appellant filed a motion for shock probation with the trial court. The record does not indicate whether the trial court ruled on this motion.

On November 22, 2000, this court dismissed appellant's appeal pursuant to appellant's request.

On November 29, 2000, appellant filed the following: a notice of appeal, a motion to appoint counsel on appeal, and a motion for leave to file late notice of appeal.

Because appellant voluntarily dismissed his appeal from the May 23 judgment, this court does not have jurisdiction to hear the merits of an appeal from that judgment. Nor does this court have jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the order, if any, denying the motion for shock probation. Jimenez v. County of Val Verde, 993 S.W.2d 167, 168 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1999, pet. denied) (finding no jurisdiction over order denying shock probation). Therefore, on December 27, 2000, this court ordered appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant's November 29th motions were held in abeyance pending appellant's response to this show cause order.

Appellant has not responded to the show cause order; therefore, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. Further, appellant's motion to appoint counsel on appeal and motion for leave to file late notice of appeal are DENIED. See Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (out-of-time appeal from felony conviction may be sought by filing a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.07).

DO NOT PUBLISH

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

Related

Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals
802 S.W.2d 241 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Jimenez v. County of Val Verde
993 S.W.2d 167 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Joe Jason Ortiz v. State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joe-jason-ortiz-v-state-of-texas-texapp-2001.