Lawrence Woods v. United States ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                      IN THE
    TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
    No. 10-16-00115-CR
    LAWRENCE WOODS,
    Appellant
    v.
    THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Appellee
    U.S. District Court
    Western District of Texas
    Trial Court No. W-15-CR-0321
    CORRECTED MEMORANDUM OPINION
    In this interlocutory appeal, appellant, Lawrence Woods, challenges a ruling of
    United States District Judge Walter Smith for the Western District of Texas, Waco
    1  We withdraw our opinion and judgment issued on April 21, 2016, to make clerical, non-
    dispositive changes to the heading and substitute this opinion in its place.
    Division. Because we lack jurisdiction over a ruling made by a federal district court, we
    dismiss appellant’s appeal.2
    Jurisdiction is fundamental and cannot be ignored. State v. Roberts, 
    940 S.W.2d 655
    , 657 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Our jurisdiction must be legally invoked. Lopez v. State,
    
    114 S.W.3d 711
    , 714 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.) (citing Ex parte Caldwell,
    
    383 S.W.2d 587
    , 589 (Tex. Crim. App. 1964)). If not legally invoked, our power to act is as
    if it did not exist. 
    Id. (citing Ex
    parte 
    Caldwell, 383 S.W.2d at 589
    ). When we lack
    jurisdiction to act, we have no power to dispose of the purported appeal in any manner
    other than dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. Olivo v. State, 
    918 S.W.2d 519
    , 523 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 1996).
    Article 4.03 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides: “The Courts of Appeals
    shall have appellate jurisdiction coextensive with the limits of their respective districts in
    all criminal cases except those in which the death penalty has been assessed.” TEX. CODE
    CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 4.03 (West 2015); see TEX. CONST. art. V, § 6(a). The Tenth Court of
    Appeals District “is composed of the counties of Bosque, Burleson, Brazos, Coryell, Ellis,
    Falls, Freestone, Hamilton, Hill, Johnson, Leon, Limestone, Madison, McLennan,
    Navarro, Robertson, Somervell, and Walker.” TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.201(k) (West
    2  A motion for rehearing may be filed within fifteen days after the judgment or order of this Court
    is rendered. TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1. If the appellant desires to have the decision of this Court reviewed by the
    Court of Criminal Appeals, a petition for discretionary review must be filed in the Court of Criminal
    Appeals within thirty days after either the day of the court of appeals' judgment was rendered or the day
    the last timely motion for rehearing was overruled by the court of appeals. See 
    id. at R.
    68.2(a).
    Woods v. The United States of America                                                                  Page 2
    Supp. 2015). This Court is not vested with appellate jurisdiction over rulings from federal
    district courts. See id.; see also TEX. CONST. art. V, § 6(a); TEX. CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 4.03.
    Therefore, because appellant improperly seeks to challenge a ruling made by a
    federal court in a state intermediate appellate court, we hereby dismiss appellant’s
    conviction for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 4.03; see also TEX.
    CONST. art. V, § 6(a).
    AL SCOGGINS
    Justice
    Before Chief Justice Gray,
    Justice Davis, and
    Justice Scoggins
    Appeal dismissed
    Opinion delivered and filed May 5, 2016
    Do not publish
    [CR25]
    Woods v. The United States of America                                                     Page 3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-16-00115-CR

Filed Date: 5/5/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 5/6/2016