Victor Tyrone Aplon v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 22, 2008
• Docket: 07-07-00497-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

NO. 07-07-0496-CR

                                                             07-07-0497-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

JANUARY 22, 2008

                                       ______________________________

VICTOR TYRONE APLON, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY;

NO. 87672, 88596; HONORABLE JOHN STEVENS, JUDGE

_______________________________

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION

            Appellant Victor T. Aplon, acting pro se, filed a document with this Court on December 17, 2007, entitled “Petition for Acquittal and Arrest of Judgment.” Finding reason to doubt our jurisdiction over the matters addressed in appellant’s “petition,” we requested by letter dated December 21 that he file any documents considered necessary for the Court to determine our jurisdiction.

          On January 10, 2008, in response to our letter, appellant filed a document entitled ”Determination of Jurisdiction Petition” in which he references various appellate rules that he contends confer jurisdiction on this Court. As we read his documents, appellant raises issues in connection with his convictions and resulting sentences in a district court of Jefferson County. The documents reference two causes in the Criminal District Court of Jefferson County, and recite that appellant appealed from the judgments to the Ninth Court of Appeals.

          In support of this Court’s jurisdiction, appellant quotes several of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Those Rules establish procedures, not the jurisdiction of the appellate courts. Bayless v. State, 91 S.W.3d 801, 805 (Tex.Crim.App. 2002). This court’s appellate jurisdiction generally is limited to cases appealed from trial courts in our court of appeals district, which does not include Jefferson County. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.201 (Vernon 2004). We see no basis for jurisdiction over appeal of appellant’s Jefferson County convictions, 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 documents indirectly refer to Rule 17.1 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, which concerns instances in which a court of appeals is unable to take immediate action, and directly refer to Rule 17.2, which provides 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 applies here. Appellant’s petitions discuss actions taken by the Ninth Court of Appeals, which demonstrates conclusively that Rule 17 of the appellate rules has no application here.

          Appellant mentions in his response to our December 21 letter that the Ninth Court of Appeals “has sent other cases” to this Court. That is true, but cases are transferred to this Court from other courts of appeals pursuant to statute and by order of the Supreme Court of Texas, not by action of the appellant. Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.220 (Vernon 2004); Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 73.001 (Vernon 2005). We take judicial notice that appellant’s appeals from his Jefferson County convictions mentioned in his documents have not been transferred to this Court.

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

 

                                                                           James T. Campbell

                                                                                     Justice

Do not publish.

e" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>

07-11-0252-CR

PANEL E

JULY 26, 2011

______________________________

MICHAEL WAYNE PARRISH, APPELLANT

FROM THE 181^ST DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNTY;

NO. 21,891-B; HONORABLE JOHN B. BOARD, JUDGE

Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE, J., and BOYD, S.J.[1]

  Pursuant to a plea bargain, Appellant, Michael Wayne Parrish, was convicted of assault on a public servant[2] and sentenced to four years confinement.  The Trial Court's Certification of Defendant's Right to Appeal indicates that Appellant's case was a plea-bargain case with no right of appeal and that Appellant waived his right of appeal.

            By letter dated June 30, 2011, this Court notified Appellant's appointed counsel of the consequences of the certification and invited him to either file an amended certification showing a right of appeal or demonstrate other grounds for continuing the appeal on or before July 15, 2011.  Counsel was also notified that failure to do so might result in dismissal of the appeal pursuant to Rule 25.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.  Counsel did not respond to this Court's notice.

            Because neither an amended certification reflecting a right of appeal was filed nor good cause for continuing the appeal provided, this appeal is dismissed based on the certification signed by the trial court.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

                                                                                    Patrick A. Pirtle

                                                                                          Justice

---

[1]John T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Ret.), Seventh Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment.  Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 75.002(a)(1) (West 2005).

[2]Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.01(b)(1) (West 2011).