In re John Finley, Lewis Raby, William Gauntt, and Judge Cox--Appeal from 87th District Court of Freestone County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 10-06-00356-CV

Case Date: 11/15/2006

Plaintiff: Garland Fleming

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from 106th District Court of Dawson County

Preview:Garland Fleming v. The State of Texas--Appeal from
106th District Court of Dawson County
11th Court of Appeals
Eastland, Texas
Opinion
Garland Fleming
Appellant
Vs. Nos. 11-05-00175-CR & 11-05-00176-CR -- Appeals from Dawson County
State of Texas
Appellee
Garland Fleming is attempting to appeal the trial court=s denial of two pro se motions requesting nunc pro tunc orders.
We dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction.
In his motions filed in the trial court, Fleming asks the trial court to reform the sentences in his 1998 convictions. Upon
receipt of Fleming=s notices of appeal, the clerk of this court wrote Fleming advising him that the trial court=s denial
of his motions did not appear to be appealable and requesting that Fleming respond showing grounds for continuing
these appeals.
Fleming has responded by forwarding copies of the April 1, 2005, orders denying his motions for nunc pro tunc orders.
Fleming has also filed a pro se response in which, for the first time, he asserts that the trial court=s 1998 judgments are
Avoid and voidable@ and are Aabsolutely null and void and incapable of being confirmed, ratified, or enforced in any
manner or to a degree.@ [1]
The April 1, 2005, orders are not appealable orders. The appeals are dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
June 9, 2005 PER CURIAM
Do not publish. See TEX.R.APP.P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Arnot, C.J., and
Wright, J., and McCall, J.
[1]These arguments might be appropriate for a proceeding pursuant to TEX. CODE CRIM. PRO. ANN. art. 11.07
(Vernon 2005).
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/7909.html[8/20/2013 7:24:24 PM]

Download 7909.pdf