Rodney Keith Hazlip v. The State of Texas Appeal from 221st District Court of Montgomery County (memorandum opinion by chief justice mckeithen)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-14-00477-CR ____________________ RODNEY KEITH HAZLIP, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _______________________________________________________ ______________ On Appeal from the 221st District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 10-04-04149 CR ________________________________________________________ _____________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Rodney Keith Hazlip filed a notice of appeal regarding the trial court’s order of October 9, 2014, which denied a motion that Hazlip filed in his criminal case after his conviction was affirmed on appeal. See Hazlip v. State, No. 09-11-00086CR, 2012 WL 4466352, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont Sept. 26, 2012, pet. ref’d) (mem. op.) (not designated for publication), cert. denied by Hazlip v. Texas, 134 S.Ct. 2704 (2014). On November 13, 2014, we notified the parties that our jurisdiction was not apparent from the notice of appeal, and that we would dismiss 1 the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless we received a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. Hazlip filed a response, but failed to demonstrate jurisdiction in that response. “Jurisdiction must be expressly given to the courts of appeals in a statute.” Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). The general right of appeal in a criminal case is limited to appeal from a judgment of conviction. See Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 695-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.02 (West 2006). Hazlip’s motion sought the release of juror card information. A trial court may disclose juror information in certain circumstances, but the statute that authorizes the trial court’s action does not expressly authorize an appeal of an adverse ruling on a request that is made in a closed case. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 35.29 (West Supp. 2014). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. APPEAL DISMISSED. ________________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice Submitted on January 13, 2015 Opinion Delivered January 14, 2015 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 2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.
