Jose Raynaldo Baca v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 287th District Court of Parmer County (majority)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-12-0400-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B OCTOBER 26, 2012 JOSE RAYNALDO BACA, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE _____________________________ FROM THE 287TH DISTRICT COURT OF PARMER COUNTY; NO. 3101; HONORABLE GORDON HOUSTON GREEN, PRESIDING Memorandum Opinion Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Jose Raynaldo Baca appeals from a trial court order denying his Motion to Obtain Court Documents for purposes of post-conviction litigation. He asks that we overrule the court s decision and instruct the court to present these documents to [him] in a timely manner. On September 14, 2012, we sent appellant a letter asking to him to demonstrate why this court has jurisdiction over the matter and gave him until September 24, 2012,to do so. To date, we have received no response from appellant. An appellate court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal only if it is from a final judgment, Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001), and we have jurisdiction to consider immediate appeals of interlocutory orders only if a statute explicitly provides appellate jurisdiction. Stary v. DeBord, 967 S.W.2d 352, 352-53 (Tex. 1998). The trial court s order denying appellant free copies of documents in the record for purposes of post-conviction litigation does not invoke our jurisdiction. Self v. State, 122 S.W.3d 294 (Tex. App. Eastland 2003, no pet.); Diaz v. State, No. 07-1000328-CV, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 1985, at *3 (Tex. App. Amarillo January 21, 2011, pet. ref d) (mem. op.). Furthermore, we have no jurisdiction over post-conviction writs of habeas corpus in felony cases. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2012); Board of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). Without a final, appealable order, we are without jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish. 2