Summary
In Tignor v. State, 76 Ark. 489, 89 S.W. 96, and Hogue v. State, 194 Ark. 1089, 110 S.W.2d 11, we held that this instruction is proper, if accompanied by an instruction that on the whole case the guilt of the defendant must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Summary of this case from Mode v. StateOpinion
No. 03-05-00561-CR
Filed: September 23, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the District Court of Tom Green County, 51st Judicial District, No. 13,893-a, Honorable Curt F. Steib, Judge Presiding. Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction.
Before Justices B.A. SMITH, PATTERSON and PURYEAR.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Phillip Lyle Tignor filed a "request for nunc pro tunc order" in the district court seeking a restoration of time credits he lost when his parole was revoked. The court denied the motion and Tignor filed notice of appeal. We do not have jurisdiction except as expressly granted by law. See Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991). No appeal lies from an order denying a request for judgment nunc pro tunc. Everett v. State, 82 S.W.3d 735 (Tex.App.-Waco 2002, pet. ref'd). We are not aware of any statute vesting this Court with jurisdiction over this appeal. The appeal is dismissed.