Eugenio Espinoza Martinez v. State

NUMBER 13-12-00477-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ HERMELINDA P. REYNA JR., APPELLANT, v.

STATE OF TEXAS ADULT PROTECTIVE

CUSTODY & REGULATORY, APPELLEE. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Benavides, and Perkes Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Hermelinda P. Reyna Jr. attemped to perfect an appeal from an order issued by the 319th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. Upon review of the documents before the Court, it appeared that there was no final, appealable judgment. On July 25, 2012, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 42.3. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the notice, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant has responded by filing an “Order of Appellate Granted by Judicare Record of Services 2009—Reversals of Fees, Fines, Services: of #95-6709-E.”

In terms of appellate jurisdiction, appellate courts only have jurisdiction to review final judgments and certain interlocutory orders identified by statute. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to correct the defect in this matter, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a),(c).

PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the

31st day of August, 2012.