Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

255 S.W.3d 273

Chudej v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco) · decided 2008-04-01

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 2008

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[n]o statute authorizes an appeal from an order under section 501.014(e).”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Johnson v. TENTH JUD. DIST. CT OF APPEALS

Applies TX GV § 501.014

Relies on Rushing v. State · Abdullah v. State · In Re Keeling

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2008-04-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION

PER CURIAM.

¶2Kevin Lee Chudej appeals from an order issued under section 501.014(e) of the Government Code directing the Department of Criminal Justice to withdraw funds from his inmate trust account for payment of court costs and fees incurred in connection with his felony conviction. Because this is a criminal law matter and because no statute authorizes such an appeal, we will dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

¶3This Court has appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case only when expressly provided by law. Kelly v. State, 151 S.W.3d 683, 685 (Tex.App.-Waco 2004, no pet.); see also Rushing v. State, 85 S.W.3d 283, 285 (Tex.Crim.App.2002) (right to appeal “is derived entirely from statute”). No statute authorizes an appeal from an order under section 501.014(e). See Gross v. State, No. 07-06-00489-CR, — S.W.3d —, —, 2007 WL 2089365, at *2 (Tex.App.-Amarillo July 23, 2007, no pet.); contra Abdullah v. State, 211 S.W.3d 938 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2007, no pet.) (addressing merits of such an appeal).

¶4Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.1

¶5Chief Justice GRAY dissenting.

¶6. Chudej is not necessarily without a remedy. See In re Keeling, 227 S.W.3d 391 (Tex.App.Waco 2007, orig. proceeding).

/255/sw3d/273 · .json · Public domain