Neil Noble v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 2, 2013
Docket05-13-00591-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Neil Noble v. State (Neil Noble v. State) 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
Neil Noble v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

Dismiss and Opinion Filed July 2, 2013

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-13-00591-CR

NEIL NOBLE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F06-86575

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Myers and Evans Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Neil Noble filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the trial court asking that the trial

court order the Dallas County District Attorney to review appellant’s motion to vacate his plea.

The trial court did not rule on the petition for writ of mandamus and appellant filed a notice of

appeal from the trial court’s “decision.” We conclude we lack jurisdiction over the appeal.

“Jurisdiction concerns the power of a court to hear and determine a case.” Olivo v. State,

918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). The jurisdiction of an appellate court must be

legally invoked, and, if not, the power of the court to act is as absent as if it did not exist. See id.

at 523. As a general rule, an appellate court may consider appeals by criminal defendants only

after conviction. Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.––Dallas 1998, no pet.). A

court of appeals has no jurisdiction over an appeal absent a written judgment or an appealable order. See Gutierrez v. State, 307 S.W.3d 318, 321 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010); Nikrasch v. State,

698 S.W.2d 443, 450 (Tex. App.––Dallas 1985, no pet.).

In this case, the trial court did not rule on appellant’s petition for writ of mandamus.

Therefore, there is neither a judgment nor an appealable order, leaving us without jurisdiction.

See Gutierrez, 307 S.W.3d at 321; Nikrasch, 698 S.W.2d at 450.

We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

/Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 130591F.U05

–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

NEIL NOBLE, Appellant On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-13-00591-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F06-86575. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Myers and Evans participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Judgment entered July 2, 2013

–3–

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

Related

Gutierrez v. State
307 S.W.3d 318 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2010)
Wright v. State
969 S.W.2d 588 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)
Nikrasch v. State
698 S.W.2d 443 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1985)
Olivo v. State
918 S.W.2d 519 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Neil Noble v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neil-noble-v-state-texapp-2013.