FILED !N SUPREME COURT 0F TFXAS 10-0496 AUG 18 2010 NO. 12-09-00317-CV [3LAKE HA\iVTHORNE, Clerk 8y Depu~ IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

§ APPEAL FROM THE 114TH LVRE:CHARLESROS~ APPELLANT § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

§ SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM We withdraw our memorandum opinion and judgment of March 20, 2010, and issue this substitute memorandum opinion and accompanying judgment in its place. See TEX. R. App. P. 19.3(a) (permitting court, after expiration of plenary power, to correct clerical error in opinion and judgment). Appellant Charles Ross filed a document in the trial court entitled "Petition for Smith County District Judge Determination for Probable Cause to Court of Inquiry or Convening Special Grand Jury." By written order signed on August 5, 2009, the trial court denied the relief sought and dismissed the cause. Ross filed a notice of appeal from the order. On January 26, 2010, this court notified Ross that the district clerk's record received in this appeal does not include a final judgment or other appealable order. See In re Court of Inquiry, 148 S.W.3d 554, 555 (Tex. App.-EI Paso 2004, no pet.) (no appeal from district judge's determination under Chapter 52 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure). Therefore, the record docs not show that this court has jurisdiction of the appeal. Ross was further notified that his appeal would be dismissed if the information received in the appeal was not amended on or before February 25, 20 I 0 to show the jurisdiction of this court. On February 3, 1010, we received a copy of a letter Ross sent to the district clerk requesting that the trial court be asked to prepare and sign a tlnal judgment to be included in the appellate record. Along with the copy of the letter, we received a copy of a "Motion for Final Judgment," which had been sent to the district clerk for filing. However, we have not received a final judgment or other appealable order in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want ofjurisdiction. See TEX. R. ApP. P. 37.2, 42.3. Opinion delivered August 18, 2010. Panel consisted of War/hen, CJ, Griffith, J, and Hoyle, J

(PL'BLISH)

2 COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT AUGUST 18,2010

NO. 12-09-00317-CV

IN RE: CHARLES ROSS, APPELLANT

Appeal from the 114th Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 09-1723-B)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of the court that this Court is without jurisdiction of the petition for writ of mandamus, and that the appeal should be DISMISSED. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by the Court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C1., Griffith, 1., and Hoyle, 1.

3