TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-15-00495-CV
Ronald D. Patton, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 299TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. D-1-DC-14-205610, HONORABLE KAREN SAGE, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Ronald D. Patton, an inmate appearing pro se, has filed a notice of “appeal
to recover property loss.” However, based on the information provided in Patton’s notice, it does
not appear that Patton first sought relief in the trial court and that he now seeks to appeal a
final judgment.
Unless a statute authorizes an interlocutory appeal, the jurisdiction of this Court is
limited to the review of final judgments. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §§ 51.12, 51.014; Lehmann
v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). After reviewing Patton’s notice of appeal, the
clerk of this Court notified Patton that it appeared that the Court lacked jurisdiction to consider his
appeal. The clerk requested that Patton respond in writing to explain why this Court has jurisdiction
over his appeal and informed Patton that his appeal would be subject to dismissal if he did not
respond by August 17, 2015.
To date, Patton has not responded to the Court’s inquiry, and we have not been
provided with a clerk’s record containing a final judgment. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for
want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).
____________________________________
Scott K. Field, Justice
Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Field
Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: October 16, 2015
2