Jimmie Mark Parrott, Jr. v. State ( 2011 )

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 16, 2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-11-00450-CR

____________

JIMMIE MARK PARROT, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 230th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1227343

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant entered a guilty plea to theft.  In accordance with the terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant on January 22, 2010, to confinement for fifteen years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.  The appeal was dismissed by this court on April 1, 2010.  Parrot v. State, No. 14-10-00160-CR, 2010 WL 1236399 (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] 2010, no pet.) (not designated for publication).

Appellant filed another notice of appeal on April 13, 2011. The notice states appellant “desires to appeal the Nunc Pro Tunc Order that was issued and signed by this Court, date unknown, to change, alter, or correct the Judgment of Sentence in the above styled and cause number action.”   The record before this court contains no such order. 

Generally, an appellate court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant from a final judgment of conviction.  Workman v. State, 170 Tex. Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.CFort Worth 1996, no pet.).  The exceptions 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.CDallas 1998, no pet.);  McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. 

Because this appeal does not fall within the exceptions to the general rule that appeal may be taken only from a final judgment of conviction, we have no jurisdiction.  Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Brown, and Christopher.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)