Phillip A. Adams v. The State of Texas Appeal from 29th District Court of Palo Pinto County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion filed July 21, 2016 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________ No. 11-16-00184-CR __________ PHILLIP A. ADAMS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 29th District Court Palo Pinto County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 10,947 MEMORANDUM OPINION Phillip A. Adams has filed a pro se notice of appeal from the trial court’s order denying Adams’s postconviction motion for a free copy of the clerk’s file and all exhibits in possession of the trial court clerk. Adams asserts that he is indigent and needs a copy of the complete clerk’s file because it contains evidence that is pertinent to a forthcoming Article 11.07 application for writ of habeas corpus. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West 2015). We dismiss the appeal. The clerk of this court wrote Adams on July 6, 2016, and informed him that it did not appear that the order from which he appealed was a final, appealable order. We requested that he respond in writing and show grounds to continue the appeal. Adams has filed a response, but he has not shown grounds to continue. In his response, Adams reiterates that he needs the clerk’s file, as well as the prosecutor’s file, so that he can prepare an Article 11.07 application. An intermediate court of appeals is not vested with jurisdiction to consider an appeal from an order denying a request for a free copy of the trial record when such request is not presented in conjunction with a timely filed appeal. Self v. State, 122 S.W.3d 294 (Tex. App.— Eastland 2003, no pet.). No statute vests this court with such jurisdiction. Yovanovitch v. State, No. 02-16-00039-CR, 2016 WL 1163749, at *1 (Tex. App.— Fort Worth Mar. 24, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Adams’s request in this case was not presented in conjunction with a timely filed appeal from his conviction. Consequently, we have no jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM July 21, 2016 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson, J., and Bailey, J. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
