Appellant, Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc.//Cross-Appellant, Liberty Coach, Inc. v. Appellees, Motor Vehicle Board of the Texas Department of Transportation and Liberty Coach, Inc.//Cross-Appellee, Budd

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 03-04-00200-CV

Case Date: 07/28/2005

Plaintiff: ROBERT LONGORIA

Defendant: THE STATE OF TEXAS--Appeal from 214th District Court of Nueces County

Preview:Robert Martinez v. State of Texas--Appeal from 227th Judicial District Court of Bexar County
No. 04-00-00755-CR Robert MARTINEZ, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 1999-CR-5936 Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Phil Hardberger, Chief Justice Tom Rickhoff, Justice Alma L. L pez, Justice Delivered and Filed: May 30, 2001 DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION Robert Martinez ("Martinez") filed a general notice of appeal to complain of the trial court's judgment deferring his adjudication for a felony offense and placing him on five years community supervision. The punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by Martinez. To invoke the court's jurisdiction over this appeal, rule 25.2(b)(3) requires that the notice of appeal specify that the appeal is from a jurisdictional defect, specify that the substance of the appeals was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, or state that the trial court granted permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3). Because Martinez's general notice of appeal did not meet any of the requirements of rule 25.2(b)(3), this court only has jurisdiction to consider issues relating to the trial court's jurisdiction. See Cooper v. State, No. 1100-99, 2001 WL 321579 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 4, 2001); Watson v. State, 924 S.W.2d 711, 714-15 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Martinez v. State, 5 S.W.3d 722, 724-25 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1999, no pet.). Given the jurisdictional limits on Martinez's appeal, we ordered appellate counsel to submit a letter identifying the issues to be raised on appeal and explaining how this court had jurisdiction to consider those issues. Appellate counsel failed to respond. The record fails to demonstrate that an issue exists relating to the trial court's jurisdiction. Because the appeal does not raise any issues that this court has jurisdiction to consider, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH

file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/13956.html[8/20/2013 7:33:45 PM]

Download 13956.pdf