Thomas Everett Nix v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 71st District Court of Harrison County

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana ______________________________ No. 06-11-00083-CR ______________________________ THOMAS EVERETT NIX, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 71st Judicial District Court Harrison County, Texas Trial Court No. 88-0275X Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss MEMORANDUM OPINION Thomas Everett Nix has filed a notice of appeal from the trial court s denial of his motion for judgment nunc pro tunc. The right to appeal in a criminal case is a substantive right determined solely within the province of the Legislature. Lyon v. State, 872 S.W.2d 732, 734 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). A defendant in any criminal action has the right of appeal under the rules hereinafter prescribed. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West 2006). Generally, a criminal defendant may only appeal from a final judgment. See State v. Sellers, 790 S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990). The courts of appeals do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Ahmad v. State, 158 S.W.3d 525, 526 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 2004, pet. ref d). We do not have jurisdiction over an appeal from an order denying a request for judgment nunc pro tunc. See generally State v. Ross, 953 S.W.2d 748, 751 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); Sanchez v. State, 112 S.W.3d 311 (Tex. App. Corpus Christi 2003, no pet.); Everett v. State, 82 S.W.3d 735 (Tex. App. Waco 2002, pet. dism d); Allen v. State, 20 S.W.3d 164, 165 (Tex. App. Texarkana 2000, no pet.). 2 We dismiss for want of jurisdiction. Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice Date Submitted: Date Decided: June 30, 2011 July 1, 2011 Do Not Publish 3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.