From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arnold v. State

STATE OF TEXAS IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
Feb 21, 2018
No. 10-18-00055-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 21, 2018)

Summary

dismissing appeal of order denying motion to recuse and disqualify for want of jurisdiction

Summary of this case from Fineberg v. State

Opinion

No. 10-18-00055-CR

02-21-2018

JAY WARREN ARNOLD, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2013-8-C2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Jay Warren Arnold attempts to appeal from an order denying and dismissing his motion to recuse and motion to disqualify a trial court judge.

The denial of a motion to recuse can be reviewed only on appeal from a final judgment. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 18a(j)(1)(A). There is no final judgment in the above case. Further, the denial of a motion to disqualify is reviewable by mandamus or by appeal in accordance with other law. Id. (j)(2). Arnold has not filed a petition for writ of mandamus, and we have found no law that authorizes an interlocutory appeal in a criminal case from the denial of a motion to disqualify.

Accordingly, we have no jurisdiction of this appeal, and it is dismissed. See Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 697 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (no jurisdiction where appeal is not authorized by law).

Moreover, the trial court's order reflects that the motion to recuse or disqualify the trial court judge was filed in anticipation of filing an article 11.07 petition for writ of habeas corpus. The trial court properly determined that until the petition was actually filed, "there is no justiciable matter presented to which recusal or disqualification of the presiding judge of the court might apply." We have no jurisdiction when there is no case in controversy, see The State Bar v. Gomez, 891 S.W.2d 243, 245 (Tex. 1994), nor do we have jurisdiction to issue advisory rulings. Tex. Ass'n of Bus. v. Tex. Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440, 444 (Tex. 1993).

Notwithstanding that we are dismissing this appeal, Arnold may file a motion for rehearing with this Court within 15 days after this opinion and judgment are rendered if he believes this opinion and judgment are erroneously based on inaccurate information or documents. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1. Moreover, if Arnold desires to have the opinion and judgment of this Court reviewed by filing a petition for discretionary review, that petition must be filed with the Court of Criminal Appeals within 30 days after either the day this Court's judgment is rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2(a).

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins
Appeal dismissed
Opinion delivered and filed February 21, 2018
Do not publish
[CR25]


Summaries of

Arnold v. State

STATE OF TEXAS IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
Feb 21, 2018
No. 10-18-00055-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 21, 2018)

dismissing appeal of order denying motion to recuse and disqualify for want of jurisdiction

Summary of this case from Fineberg v. State
Case details for

Arnold v. State

Case Details

Full title:JAY WARREN ARNOLD, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:STATE OF TEXAS IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

Date published: Feb 21, 2018

Citations

No. 10-18-00055-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 21, 2018)

Citing Cases

Fineberg v. State

To the extent appellant seeks to appeal the denial of her post-conviction motion to disqualify the Dallas…