Kenneth Hickman-Bey v. Texas Board of Criminal Justice ( 2012 )

NUMBER 13-11-00714-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________
KENNETH HICKMAN-BEY, Appellant,
v.
TEXAS BOARD OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, ET AL., Appellees.
____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 36th District Court
of Bee County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Benavides, Vela, and Perkes
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam
Appellant, Kenneth Hickman-Bey, attempted to perfect an appeal from the trial
court’s order denying his motion for a nunc pro tunc for out of time appeal in trial
court cause number B-10-1416-0-CV-A. Because this denial is not an appealable
order, we dismiss for want of jurisdiction.
Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that the order from
which this appeal was taken was not an appealable order. On December 13, 2011, the
Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct
the defect, if it could be done. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected
within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court’s letter, the appeal would be
dismissed. In response, appellant filed a motion to retain appeal and a motion for judicial
notice. Appellant states that the reporter’s record demonstrates that the trial court
granted an out of time appeal.
In terms of appellate jurisdiction, appellate courts only have jurisdiction to review
final judgments and certain interlocutory orders identified by statute. Lehmann v.
Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). See Shadowbrook Apartments v.
Abu-Ahmad, 783 S.W.2d 210, 211 (Tex. 1990) (holding that order denying motion for
judgment nunc pro tunc is not appealable).
The Court, having fully reviewed and considered the documents herein, concludes
that the order appealed from fails to invoke our appellate jurisdiction and is of the opinion
that the cause should be dismissed. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF
JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Any other pending motions are likewise
DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the
29th day of March, 2012.
2