Home/Court of Appeals of Texas/Roosevelt Allen v. State

Roosevelt Allen v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 16, 2008
Docket07-07-00487-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Roosevelt Allen v. State (Roosevelt Allen 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
Roosevelt Allen v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

NO. 07-07-0487-CR

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


AT AMARILLO


PANEL D


JANUARY 16, 2008

______________________________

ROOSEVELT ALLEN, JR., APPELLANT


V.


THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________


FROM THE 252ND DISTRICT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY;


NO. 07-00816; HONORABLE LARRY GIST, JUDGE

_______________________________



Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

            Appellant Roosevelt Allen Jr., acting pro se, filed a document with this court on December 3, 2007, entitled “Petition for Acquittal and Arrest of Judgment Review.” Finding reason to doubt our jurisdiction over the matters addressed in appellant’s “petition,” we requested by letter dated December 11 that he file any documents considered necessary for the court to determine our jurisdiction.

          On December 13, 2007, appellant filed a document entitled ”Anders’ Brief for Appellant” in which he references his petition filed on December 3. As we read his documents, appellant raises issues in connection with his conviction and sentencing in a district court of Jefferson County. The documents reference cause number 07-00816 in the Criminal District Court of Jefferson County, and recite that appellant appealed from the judgment to the Ninth Court of Appeals in October 2007.

          On December 27, 2007, we received appellant’s response to our December 11 letter. In support of this court’s jurisdiction, appellant provides a copy of the memorandum opinion of the Ninth Court of Appeals, issued November 28, 2007, dismissing his appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d). He contends the dismissal demonstrates he has been subjected to abused discretion, and raises a complaint about the form of the Ninth Court’s memorandum opinion.

          This court’s appellate jurisdiction generally is limited to cases appealed from trial courts in our court of appeals district. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.201 (Vernon 2004). We see no basis for jurisdiction over appeal of appellant’s Jefferson County conviction, and nothing in the documents appellant has filed demonstrates we otherwise have authority to grant any relief he seeks. See Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522-23 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996) (listing Government Code § 22.201 among examples of laws that establish jurisdiction of courts of appeals). Appellant’s December 3 petition refers to Rule 17.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, which concerns instances in which a court of appeals is unable to take immediate action, and Rule 17.2, providing for action by “the nearest court of appeals that is able to take immediate action.” Tex. R. App. P. 17.1, 17.2. Appellant appears to contend that the rule has application here. Based on the statements in appellant’s petition, we disagree that Rule 17 of the appellate rules has application in the circumstances described. In addition, appellant provides no explanation how, given the great distance between Beaumont and Amarillo, this court could be considered the nearest available court of appeals.

          Finding we lack jurisdiction to address appellant’s pleadings, we dismiss his attempted appeal.

                                                                           James T. Campbell

                                                                                     Justice



Do not publish.                                                              

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

Related

Villescas v. State
189 S.W.3d 290 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Mayer v. State
274 S.W.3d 898 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2009)
Cochran v. State
107 S.W.3d 96 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)
Mayer v. State
309 S.W.3d 552 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2010)
Callison v. State
218 S.W.3d 822 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2007)
Olivo v. State
918 S.W.2d 519 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1996)
Brooks v. State
957 S.W.2d 30 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Roosevelt Allen v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roosevelt-allen-v-state-texapp-2008.