Natalie Aguilar v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 28, 2024
Docket13-24-00125-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Natalie Aguilar v. the State of Texas (Natalie Aguilar v. the 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
Natalie Aguilar v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2024).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-24-00125-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

NATALIE AGUILAR, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

ON APPEAL FROM THE 28TH DISTRICT COURT OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Silva Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria

Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appears there is no final

appealable order. On February 16, 2024, appellant filed a notice of appeal attempting to

appeal a conviction in trial court cause number 17FC-1495A. In response to a late brief

notice, appellant filed a response informing that the trial court granted a new trial on April 3, 2024, and included a copy of the trial court’s order with the response. Therefore, the

Court is now without jurisdiction, as there is no final judgment of conviction before it.

Generally, a state appellate court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a

criminal defendant where there has been a final judgment of conviction. Workman v.

State, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160,

161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). Exceptions to the general rule include:

(1) certain appeals while on deferred adjudication community supervision, Kirk v. State,

942 S.W.2d 624, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); (2) appeals from the denial of a motion to

reduce bond, TEX. R. APP. P. 31.1; McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161; and (3) certain appeals

from the denial of habeas corpus relief, Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—

Dallas 1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161.

Our review of the documents before the Court shows that appellant’s case is still

pending in the trial court. Moreover, the notice of appeal cannot be construed as

premature because it was filed before the trial court made a finding of guilt or received a

jury verdict. See TEX. R. APP. P. 27.1(b). Therefore, this cause is dismissed for want of

jurisdiction.

NORA L. LONGORIA Justice

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2 (b).

Delivered and filed on the 28th day of August, 2024.

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

Related

Workman v. State
343 S.W.2d 446 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1961)
Wright v. State
969 S.W.2d 588 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)
Kirk v. State
942 S.W.2d 624 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1997)
McKown v. State
915 S.W.2d 160 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Natalie Aguilar v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/natalie-aguilar-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.