Joseph Wendell Hume v. The State of Texas Appeal from 181st District Court of Randall County (memorandum opinion )
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo ________________________ No. 07-15-00433-CR No. 07-15-00434-CR No. 07-15-00435-CR No. 07-15-00436-CR No. 07-15-00437-CR ________________________ JOSEPH WENDELL HUME, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 181st District Court Randall County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 19597-B, 19600-B, 19601-B, 19611-B, 19619-B; Honorable John B. Board, Presiding January 13, 2016 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. On May 22, 2008, appellant, Joseph Wendell Hume, pled guilty to three counts of aggravated sexual assault and five counts of aggravated robbery. The trial court judge sentenced appellant to five consecutive terms of life imprisonment. On November 24, 2009, this Court affirmed the convictions.1 Accordingly, the convictions became final, and appellant is not entitled to a second appeal from these convictions. On December 1, 2015, appellant filed a single notice of appeal in each of the five original trial court causes. The notice of appeal states that appellant seeks to appeal the trial court’s refusal or failure to rule on appellant’s “petition for bill of review” filed on July 6, 2015. By letter dated December 8, 2015, the Court ordered appellant to show why the Court has jurisdiction over the appeals. Appellant has responded to the Court’s inquiry and we now dismiss the purported appeals for want of jurisdiction. This Court has jurisdiction over a criminal defendant's appeal only when it arises from a final judgment of conviction or an appealable order. See Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696–97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); see also TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2) (providing that a criminal defendant has the right to appeal a judgment of guilt or other appealable order). In his notice of appeal, appellant states that the trial court has not ruled on the petition for bill of review. Therefore, there is no final judgment of conviction or appealable order for appellant to appeal. Further, even if the trial court had denied appellant’s bill of review, this Court would not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal of such an order. See Morgan v. Klein, No. 07-12-0430-CV, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 9966, at *2-3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Nov. 29, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op). A bill of review is an equitable proceeding and an independent cause of action to set aside a civil judgment that is no longer appealable or 1 See Hume v. State, Nos. 07-08-00233-CR, 07-08-00234-CR, 07-08-00235-CR, 07-08-00236CR, 07-08-237-CR, 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 9134 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Nov. 24, 2009, no pet) (mem. op., not designated for publication). 2 subject to challenge. See Wembley Inv. Co. v. Herrera, 11 S.W.3d 924, 926-27 (Tex. 1999). It has no application in a criminal proceeding, and is not a proper procedure for challenging a criminal conviction. See Morgan, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 9966, at *2. Consequently, this proceeding is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Mackey K. Hancock Justice Do not publish. 3
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.
