Thomas Huddleston v. State ( 2011 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Nos. 04-11-00788-CR; 04-11-00789-CR & 04-11-00790-CR
Thomas HUDDLESTON,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 2002CR2762B; 2002CR 6510B & 2002 CR6511B
Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
Karen Angelini, Justice
Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Delivered and Filed: December 7, 2011
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Appellant filed a notice of appeal in each of these appeals seeking to appeal the trial
court’s order denying his motion for a judgment nunc pro tunc. The denial of a motion for a
judgment nunc pro tunc, however, is not an appealable order. See Caceras v. State, No. 04-10-
00132-CR, 2010 WL 726884, at *1 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Mar. 3, 2010, no pet.) (not
designated for publication); Castor v. State, 205 S.W.3d 666, 667 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006, no
pet.). Instead, the proper remedy to obtain review of the denial of a motion for judgment nunc
04-11-00788-CR; 04-11-00789-CR & 04-11-00790-CR
pro tunc is by petition for writ of mandamus. Caceras, 2010 WL 726884, at *1; Castor, 205
S.W.3d at 667.
On November 8, 2011, we ordered appellant to show cause in writing why these appeals
should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant did not respond to our order. The
appeals are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-