Suzanne Kearns Dewalt v. State
2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 13708
| Tex. App. | 2013Background
- Dewalt was convicted in 2006 of aggravated kidnapping of her child to thwart a custody order.
- The conviction included an affirmative finding that the victim was under 17 at the time.
- The conviction triggered Chapter 62 reporting as a “reportable conviction,” making her a sex offender under Texas law.
- She sought early termination of the reporting obligation under Subchapter I after obtaining an individual risk assessment.
- The district court denied the motion; a nunc pro tunc judgment later amended the judgment to reflect the sex-offender registration and victim’s age.
- Dewalt appealed the denial and later the nunc pro tunc judgment, arguing jurisdiction and merits under criminal proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court has jurisdiction to review the denial of early termination | Dewalt contends appellate review is authorized | State argues no statutory right to appeal denial | No jurisdiction to review the denial of early termination. |
| Whether mandamus relief is available to compel ruling on the motion | Dewalt seeks mandamus to force a decision | State argues mandamus not appropriate here | Mandamus relief not warranted; no clear right to the relief sought. |
| Whether the nunc pro tunc judgment is subject to timely appeal | Dewalt attempts to appeal the nunc pro tunc order | State asserts untimely and improper to appeal separate order | Appeal from nunc pro tunc judgment dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. |
| Whether the district court’s discretionary ruling on early termination was reversible | Dewalt argues risk assessment supports termination | State argues court properly exercised discretion | Even on merits, no reversible error found. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Fine, 330 S.W.3d 904 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (jurisdictional limits in criminal appeals; discretionary rulings not reviewable unless authorized)
- Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (no jurisdiction to review certain post-conviction orders without statutory authorization)
- Staley v. State, 233 S.W.3d 337 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (no appellate review of certain trial-court discretionary determinations)
- Ex parte McGregor, 145 S.W.3d 824 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004) (dismissal for want of jurisdiction when appeal from non-final or non-appealable order)
- Castillo v. State, 369 S.W.3d 196 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (timeliness and scope of appeals in criminal proceedings)