Kameron Pearson v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 23, 2015
• Docket: 10-15-00437-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-15-00437-CR

KAMERON PEARSON, Appellant v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 19th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013-1028-C1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

After pleading guilty under a plea bargain and waiving his right of appeal,

Appellant Kameron Pearson filed a pro se “motion nunc pro tunc reformation of

judgment to delete requirement to pay attorney’s fees.” The trial court denied the motion,

and Pearson has filed a pro se notice of appeal of that order.

We do not have appellate jurisdiction of the denial of a motion for judgment nunc

pro tunc. Everett v. State, 82 S.W.3d 735 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002, pet. dism’d). The

appropriate remedy to obtain review of the denial of a nunc pro tunc motion is by a petition for writ of mandamus. Ex parte Forooghi, 185 S.W.3d 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)

(Johnson, J., concurring statement); see also Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147, 149 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2004). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

REX D. DAVIS Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Dismissed Opinion delivered and filed December 23, 2015 Do not publish [CR25]

Pearson v. State Page 2