state-v-nine-hundred-eighty-two-thousand-one-hundred-ten-dollars-and-four ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                                     COURT OF APPEALS
    EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
    EL PASO, TEXAS
    §
    THE STATE OF TEXAS,
    §
    Appellant,                                     No. 08-11-00253-CV
    §
    v.                                                                 Appeal from the
    §
    Criminal District Court No. 1
    NINE HUNDRED EIGHTY-TWO                         §
    THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED TEN                                      of El Paso County, Texas
    DOLLARS AND FOUR BAGS                            §
    CONTAINING AN UNDETERMINED                                         (TC# 2011-712)
    AMOUNT OF US CURRENCY,                           §
    Appellees.                     §
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Appellant filed a notice of interlocutory appeal, stating its intent to appeal from the trial
    court’s denial of its plea to the jurisdiction. According to the notice of appeal, Appellant argued
    in its plea to the jurisdiction that the court lacked jurisdiction over an unnamed intervenor’s
    claim. The notice states that the trial judge orally denied the plea on August 11, 2011, and that
    Appellant submitted a proposed order on August 15, 2011. The court coordinator later informed
    Appellant that the judge was unwilling to sign the order.
    Because it appeared that there is no appealable order, the Clerk of this Court notified the
    parties of the Court’s intent to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction unless any party could
    show grounds for continuing the appeal. Appellant responded to the notice by submitting a
    partial copy of a transcript, reflecting the judge’s oral ruling. Citing Texas Rule of Appellate
    Procedure 33.1, Appellant argues that the lack of a signed order does not preclude its ability to
    seek relief from this Court.
    Rule 33.1 governs preservation of error; it does not pertain to appellate jurisdiction. See
    TEX .R.APP .P. 33.1. Rule 26.1 does pertain to jurisdiction. It provides that a notice of
    interlocutory appeal “must be filed within 20 days after the judgment or order is signed.”
    TEX .R.APP .P. 26.1(b)[Emphasis added]. Thus, an appeal may only be perfected from a written
    order, not an oral ruling. See In re Nationwide Credit, Inc., No. 13-10-00007-CV, 
    2010 WL 596809
    , at *4 (Tex.App.--Corpus Christi Feb. 18, 2010, orig. proceeding)(mem. op.); Hubbard-
    Jowers v. Starfire Enters., Ltd., No. 02-06-462-CV, 
    2007 WL 439052
    , at *1 (Tex.App.--Fort
    Worth Feb. 8, 2007, no pet.)(mem. op.); In re Johnston, 
    79 S.W.3d 195
    , 197-98 (Tex.App.--
    Texarkana 2002, orig. proceeding); see also Farmer v. Ben E. Keith Co., 
    907 S.W.2d 495
    , 496
    (Tex. 1995)(“The appellate timetable does not commence to run other than by signed, written
    order, even when the signing of such an order is purely ministerial.”).
    This appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
    September 14, 2011
    DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Chief Justice
    Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Rivera, JJ.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 08-11-00253-CV

Filed Date: 9/14/2011

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/1/2016