Jose Alfredo Perales v. State

Opinion

Opinion issued October 4, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

eighteen months.1 In June 2015, appellant filed a pro se motion for time credit in which he sought “diligent participation credit” to reduce his sentence. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.12, § 15(h) (West Supp. 2016). The trial court denied the motion, and appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

The right to appeal in a criminal case is a statutorily created right. See TEX.

CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West 2006); Bayless v. State, 91 S.W.3d 801, 805 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002); see also Keaton v. State, 294 S.W.3d 870, 871 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2009, no pet.) (citation omitted) (“The right to appeal is conferred by the Legislature and generally, a party may appeal only those cases for which the Legislature has authorized appeal.”). Generally, a criminal defendant may appeal only from a final judgment. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02; State v. Sellers, 790 S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990). The denial of a post-conviction motion for time credit is not an appealable order. Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 697 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (citation omitted).

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.

1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 31.03(a), (b), (e)(4), 31.09 (West Supp. 2016).

3

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Bland, Massengale, and Lloyd. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Footnotes

1. NO. 01-15-00637-CR ——————————— JOSE ALFREDO PERALES, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 149th District Court Brazoria County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 71698 MEMORANDUM OPINION In 2014, the trial court adjudicated appellant guilty of the state-jail-felony offense of theft—aggregated, and assessed his punishment at confinement for