JOE PILAR CALDERA, JR. v. THE STATE OF TEXAS--Appeal from 377th District Court of Victoria County

NUMBERS 13-01-528-CR, 13-01-529-CR, & 13-01-530-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

JOE PILAR CALDERA, JR., Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 377th District Court

of Victoria County, Texas.

O P I N I O N

Before Justices Hinojosa, Ya ez, and Castillo

Opinion by Justice Castillo

Joe Pilar Caldera attempts to appeal a pretrial judgment of competency in three criminal cases. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

The record in the case reveals that, on July 12, 2001, a jury found appellant competent to stand trial in the three cases before us. On August 1, 2001, appellant filed a notice of appeal of that verdict in all three cause numbers. On August 3, 2001, appellant entered a plea of guilty to all three indictments and was sentenced to thirty years imprisonment in each case.

A pretrial judgment of competency to stand trial in a criminal case is not a final judgment and is not reviewable by appeal until after a full trial on the merits of the charged offense. Jackson v. State, 548 S.W.2d 685, 689-90 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977); Lowe v. State, 999 S.W.2d 537, 537 (Tex. App.BHouston [14th Dist.] 1999, no pet.). Appellant filed a notice of appeal prior to his trial on the merits in the three cases. While generally a notice of appeal that is prematurely filed is to be deemed effective after sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, a notice of appeal which is filed before the trial court makes a finding of guilt can not be considered effective. Tex. R. App. P. 27.1(b)(emphasis added). As appellant=s notice of appeal was filed two days before the trial court entered a finding of guilt pursuant to appellant=s guilty pleas, we find that appellant=s attempted notice of appeal confers no jurisdiction on this Court. Because appellant did not file a timely, written notice of appeal after a judgment of guilt was entered, we have no jurisdiction over his appeals.[1] Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Accordingly, we dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

ERRLINDA CASTILLO

Justice

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3(b).

Opinion delivered and filed

this 16th day of May, 2002.

1 Review of the record also revealed that no objection was made to the admittance of the evidence which was the sole issue of the appeals filed in these cases. Appellant only made a pretrial motion in limine, asking the court to prohibit the introduction of the evidence. Furthermore, at the time of the actual admittance of the evidence, appellant positively averred that he had Ano objection.@ Thus, even if we had jurisdiction to consider these appeals, the sole issue raised was not preserved for our review. Bashman v. State, 608 S.W.2d 677, 679 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980).