David Cepeda Jones v. State ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •       TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
    NO. 03-12-00468-CR
    David Cepeda Jones, Appellant
    v.
    The State of Texas, Appellee
    FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 7 OF BEXAR COUNTY,
    NO. 923841, THE HONORABLE MONICA GUERRERO, JUDGE PRESIDING
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant David Cepeda Jones, acting pro se, filed a document with this Court
    entitled “Notice of Appeal/Investigation Demanded.” As we read his document, appellant raises
    issues in connection with an appeal from matters related to criminal charges dismissed in a county
    court at law of Bexar County, apparently in June 2006. The pleading references a cause number in
    County Court at Law No. 7, and complains about the purported refusal of the Fourth Court of
    Appeals to address the denial of his constitutional right to a jury trial in the dismissed case.
    This Court’s appellate jurisdiction generally is limited to cases appealed from trial
    courts in our court of appeals district, which does not include Bexar County. See Tex. Gov’t Code
    Ann. §§ 22.201(d), .220 (West Supp. 2012). We see no basis for jurisdiction over an appeal of
    matters arising out of a county court of Bexar County or over actions taken by the Fourth Court of
    Appeals, and nothing in the documents appellant has filed demonstrates we otherwise have authority
    to grant any relief he seeks. See Olivo v. State, 
    918 S.W.2d 519
    , 522-23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996)
    (listing Government Code § 22.201 among examples of laws that establish jurisdiction of courts of
    appeals).
    To any extent that appellant’s pleadings could be read as initiating an original
    appellate proceeding seeking extraordinary relief, see Tex. R. App. P. 52, we note that our
    mandamus authority also is limited. By statute, this Court has the authority to issue a writ of
    mandamus against “a judge of a district or county court in the court of appeals district” and other
    writs as necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West
    2004). The Fourth Court of Appeals is not a party against whom we may issue a writ of mandamus.
    Nor has appellant demonstrated that the exercise of our writ power is necessary to enforce our
    jurisdiction as we have no appellate jurisdiction over the Fourth Court of Appeals.
    Finding we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss his attempted appeal.
    __________________________________________
    Melissa Goodwin, Justice
    Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin
    Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
    Filed: August 2, 2012
    Do Not Publish
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-12-00468-CR

Filed Date: 8/2/2012

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/17/2015