Reginald Benard Hatton v. the State of Texas
This text of Reginald Benard Hatton v. the State of Texas (Reginald Benard Hatton 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.
Opinion
Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas
10-25-00079-CR 10-25-00080-CR
Reginald Benard Hatton, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
On appeal from the 87th District Court of Limestone County, Texas Judge Amy Thomas Ward, presiding Trial Court Cause Nos. 12029-A and 12115-A
JUSTICE HARRIS delivered the opinion of the Court.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Reginald Hatton appeals from the denial of his motion for judgment nunc
pro tunc in the above proceedings. The State has filed a Motion to Dismiss
Hatton’s appeals for lack of jurisdiction on the grounds that a denial of a
motion for judgment nunc pro tunc is not an appealable order or judgment.
An order denying a motion nunc pro tunc is not appealable. See Castor
v. State, 205 S.W.3d 666, 667 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006, no pet.). The appropriate remedy for the denial of a motion nunc pro tunc is to file a petition for writ of
mandamus in the court of appeals. Ex parte Florence, 319 S.W.3d 695, 696
(Tex. Crim. App. 2010); Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147, 148-49 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2004).
We therefore dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 43.2(f).
LEE HARRIS Justice
OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: May 22, 2025 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Dismissed Do not publish CRPM
Hatton v. State Page 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Reginald Benard Hatton v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reginald-benard-hatton-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.