TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-19-00728-CR
Luke Masood Arabzadegan, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D-1-DC-02-500454, THE HONORABLE BRENDA KENNEDY, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In June of 2005, in cause number D-1-DC-02-50044, appellant Luke Masood Arabzadegan pled guilty to murder; he was convicted and sentenced to forty-five years in prison. See Tex. Penal Code §§ 19.02(b); 12.32. On direct appeal, this Court affirmed appellant’s conviction. See Arabzadegan v. State, 240 S.W.3d 44, 45 (Tex. App.—Austin 2007, pet. ref’d). The mandate affirming the trial court’s judgment of conviction was issued on January 4, 2008.
On October 11, 2019, this Court received appellant’s pro se Notice of Appeal and Amended Notice of Appeal of his conviction.1 Appellant has already appealed his murder conviction, and mandate has issued. He is not entitled to a second appeal of this conviction. See Hines v. State, 70 S.W. 955, 957 (Tex. Crim. App. 1902) (“[O]nly one appeal can be made from
1 In his notices of appeal, appellant references his conviction in cause numbers D-1-DC-2002-500454 and D-1-DC-2005-904029. However, the record reflects that cause number D-1-DC-2005-904029 was dismissed when appellant was convicted in cause number D-1-DC-2002-500454. Thus, there is no judgment of conviction in that case.
a verdict and judgment of conviction in any case.”). Therefore, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider a second appeal from appellant’s final conviction. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. 2 See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); see, e.g., McDonald v. State, 401 S.W.3d 360, 361–63 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2013, pet. ref’d) (dismissing for want of jurisdiction defendant’s subsequent appeal of conviction that had previously been affirmed).
__________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Justice
Before Justices Goodwin, Kelly, and Smith Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction Filed: January 23, 2020 Do Not Publish
Footnotes
[2] In connection with this attempted second appeal, appellant has filed various motions in this Court. All pending motions are dismissed as moot.