Javier Davila v. State ( 2012 )

COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-11-00448-CV
Javier Davila § From Criminal District Court No. 4
§ of Tarrant County (1245988W)
v.
§ November 15, 2012
The State of Texas § Per Curiam
JUDGMENT
This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that
the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for
want of jurisdiction.
SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS
PER CURIAM
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-11-00446-CV
NO. 02-11-00447-CV
NO. 02-11-00448-CV
NO. 02-11-00449-CV
NO. 02-11-00450-CV
NO. 02-11-00451-CV
NO. 02-11-00452-CV
JAVIER DAVILA APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS APPELLEE
----------
FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 4 OF TARRANT COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
On October 21, 2011, appellant Javier Davila filed a notice of appeal
challenging the trial court’s orders to withdraw funds from his inmate trust
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2
account in seven separate trial court cause numbers. Because we were unable
to determine whether appellant’s rights to due process had been satisfied based
on the record before us, we abated the appeals on November 15, 2011 for 180
days so that appellant could obtain appealable orders from the trial court. See,
e.g., Palomo v. State, 322 S.W.3d 304, 307–08 (Tex. App.––Amarillo 2010,
order) (abating appeal to allow appellant time to file an appropriate motion to
modify, correct, or rescind the withdrawal notification and obtain a final,
appealable order addressing that motion), disp. on merits, 330 S.W.3d 920 (Tex.
App.––Amarillo 2010, no pet.); see also Tex. R. App. P. 27.2.
On June 13, 2012, we sent appellant a letter informing him that the
appeals had been reinstated but that the trial court had not rendered any
appealable orders. We told appellant that if we did not receive any written,
appealable orders or a response indicating that appellant would obtain such
orders on or before June 25, 2012, the appeals would be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction. We have received no response, and no appealable orders have
been rendered in the trial court.
3
Because there are no appealable orders for this court to review, we
dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f);
Davis v. State, No. 02-11-00016-CV, 2011 WL 5247505, at *1 (Tex. App.––Fort
Worth Nov. 3, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.).
PER CURIAM
PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and GARDNER, JJ.
DELIVERED: November 15, 2012
4