Geraro Mendiola Jr. v. the State of Texas ( 2024 )

NUMBER 13-24-00013-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
____________________________________________________
GERARO MENDIOLA JR., Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
____________________________________________________________
ON APPEAL FROM THE 227TH DISTRICT COURT
OF BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS
____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Peña
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras
Appellant filed a notice which was construed as a notice of appeal in trial court
case number 2023CR6732. 1 We now dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
1
This case is before the Court on transfer from the Fourth Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket
equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001.
On January 5, 2024, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that it appears that
there is no final, appealable judgment. Appellant was further notified that if the defect was
not corrected within thirty days from the date of the letter, the appeal would be subject to
dismissal. After no response from appellant’s counsel, on March 28, 2024, we abated the
case and reminded the matter for the trial court to determine whether the appellant or his
attorney had abandoned the appeal. On April 8, 2024, appellant’s counsel filed a motion
to dismiss indicating appellant did not intend to invoke the court of appeals’ jurisdiction in
this matter.
In addition to appellant’s motion to dismiss, we note that generally, a state
appellate court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant where
there has been a signed final judgment of conviction. Workman v. State, 343 S.W.2d 446,
447 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort
Worth 1996, no pet.). Exceptions to the general rule include: (1) certain appeals while on
deferred adjudication community supervision, see Kirk v. State, 942 S.W.2d 624, 625
(Tex. Crim. App. 1997); (2) appeals from the denial of a motion to reduce bond, see 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.—Dallas 1998, no
pet.), McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. There is no signed order currently before the Court.
Our review of the documents before the Court does not reveal an appealable order
entered by the trial court within thirty days before the filing of appellant’s notice of appeal.
The Court, having examined and fully considered the notice of appeal, is of the opinion
that there is not an appealable order, and this Court lacks jurisdiction over the matters
2
herein. Accordingly, this appeal is hereby reinstated and dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Appellant’s motion to dismiss is dismissed as moot.
DORI CONTRERAS
Chief Justice
Do not publish.
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed on the
23rd day of May, 2024.
3