Opinion filed December 2, 2010

                                                                       In The

  Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                   __________

                                                         No. 11-10-00327-CR

                                                    __________

                                      JACOB BARRON, Appellant

                                                             V.

                                      STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                                   On Appeal from the 106th District Court

                                                          Dawson County, Texas

                                                  Trial Court Cause No. 06-6548-C

                                            M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

            The trial court convicted Jacob Barron of engaging in organized criminal activity and assessed his punishment at confinement for ten years.  We dismiss. 

The sentence was imposed in open court on July 18, 2007.  On October 25, 2010, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.  Upon receiving the docketing statement and a copy of the notice of appeal, the clerk of this court wrote the parties stating that the notice of appeal appeared to be out of time and directing appellant to respond showing grounds for continuing the appeal.  Appellant has filed a response.

            In his response, appellant contends that he has timely perfected an appeal from the trial court’s order denying his motion for a judgment nunc pro tunc.  However, appellant also correctly acknowledges in his response that this is not an appealable order.

            Absent a timely notice of appeal from an appealable order or judgment or the granting of a timely motion for extension of time, this court does not have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal.  Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 209-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522-24 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Rodarte v. State, 860 S.W.2d 108, 109-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Shute v. State, 744 S.W.2d 96, 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988).  The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

                                                                                    PER CURIAM

December 2, 2010

Do not publish.  See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of:  Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.