In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _____________________ NO. 09-12-00394-CV _____________________

IN RE COMMITMENT OF JOSE MORALES __________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 435th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 01-02-01008 CV __________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In an appeal from an order entered in a sexually-violent-predator proceeding, we are asked to address whether we possess appellate jurisdiction over an order changing the entity that approves where Jose Morales is required to reside. We conclude that the trial court’s order is not appealable, and we also conclude that mandamus relief on the issues Morales raises is not warranted. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Recently, in In re Commitment of Cortez, we addressed the same issues as set forth in Morales’s brief and concluded that we did not have appellate jurisdiction over his issues. No. 09-12-00385-CV, 2013 WL 3270613, at *2 (Tex. App.—Beaumont June 27, 2013, no pet. h.). We also considered whether Cortez raised issues entitling him to mandamus relief. See id. at **2-6.

For the same reasons stated in Cortez, we conclude that we lack appellate jurisdiction to review the trial court’s order dated July 26, 2012, and that Morales has not demonstrated that he should receive mandamus relief. Accordingly, we dismiss Morales’s appeal.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

___________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice Submitted on July 10, 2013 Opinion Delivered August 15, 2013 Before Gaultney, Kreger, and Horton, JJ.