## NO. 12

- 21

- 00185

- CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

JUSTIN LEJEUNE , AP P

ELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 420TH

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

NACOGDOCHES COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM O PINION PER CURIAM

Justin LeJeune appeals from a Septe mber 16, 2021

, order deny ing his motion to disqualify the tr ial court judge. The underlying case appears to remain pending in the trial court.

On October 12 , 2021, t he Clerk of this Court notified Appel lant that the notice of appeal does not show the ju risdiction of this Cour t, i.e., the order being appealed is no t an appeala ble order. The notice further advised that the appeal would be dismissed unl ess the notice of appeal

was amended on or be fore Nove mber 12 , 2021 to show this Court ’s jurisdiction. Appellant filed

an amend ed notice of appeal , stating his “inten t to appeal by Mandamus Application for Appeal ”

to this Court on the denial of the motion to disqualify

, “an appeal from a j udgement [sic] made

on Se ptember 1 6 th , 2021. ” An order granting or denying a motion to disquali fy may be revie wed by mandamus and

may be appealed in accordance with other law. T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 18a(j)(2) ; see DeLeon v. Aguilar , 127 S.W.3d 1, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (orig. pro c eeding) (applyi ng Rule 18a to

criminal cases)

. Appellant has not filed a peti tion for writ of mandamus with this Court and his

use of the term “mandamus ” in his notice of appe al is not tantamount to filing a mandamus petition. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.1 ( “ An original appellate proceeding seekin g extraordinary

relief

-- such as a writ of habeas corpus, mandamus , prohibiti on, injunction, or quo warranto

-- is

commenced by filing a pet ition with the clerk of the appropriate appellate court.” ) ( emphas is2 add ed ) ; see also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.3 (form and co ntents of petition ) ; Fineberg v . State
, No. 05

- 20

- 00163

- CR, 2020 WL 2110667 , at *4 (Tex. App.

— Dallas May 4, 2020, no pet

. ) (mem. op.,

not desig nated for publication) (rejecting request to treat notice of appeal as man damus petition;

two

- page notice did not meet requirements of Rule 52)

. And “[t] here is no ‘ oth er law ’ allowing an interlocutory appeal of a n order denying a motion to disqual ify in a criminal case. ”

Muh ammad v. State
, No. 08

- 18

- 00125

- CR, 2018 WL 3751742 , at *1 (Tex. App.

— El Paso Aug.
8, 2018
, pet. ref ’d ) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Accordingly, because an interlocutory appeal of the order denying Appellant ’s m otion to disqualif y is not authorized , we conclude that we lack jurisdiction to co nsider this appeal. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 43.2(f). We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. Opinion delivered November 10, 2021. Panel con sisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyl e, J., and Neeley, J.

( DO NOT PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH CO URT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

NOVEMBER 10 , 2021

NO. 12

- 21

- 00185

- CR

JUSTIN LEJEUNE , Appellant V. T HE STA TE OF TEXAS , Appellee

Appeal from the 420th District Court

of Nacogdoches County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. C21363 21 )

THIS CAU SE came on to be heard on t he appellate record, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this C ourt that it is wi thout juri sdi ction of the appeal, and

th at the ap peal should be dismissed.
It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Cou rt that this appe al be, and the same is, hereby dism issed for want of jurisdiction ; and that this decision

be certified to t he court b elo w for observance.
By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.

# THE S TATE OF TEXAS M A N D A T E

* ********************************************

TO THE 420TH DISTRICT COURT OF NACOGDOCHES COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 8th day of November, 2 021 , the ca use upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

JUSTIN LEJEUNE , Appellant

NO. 12

- 21

- 00185

- CR ; Trial Court No. C2136321

By per curiam op inion.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these wo rds:

“THIS CAUSE came on to b e heard on the motion of the Appellant to dismiss the appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED , ADJU DGED and DECREED by this Court that the motion to dismiss be granted and the appeal be dis missed, and that the decision be certifi ed to the court below for observance.”
WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Twelf th Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly
recog nized, obey ed, and executed.

WITNESS, TH E HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN , Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal t hereof affixed, at the City of Tyler, this the xx day of November, 2021.

By:

_ _____ ___________ ______________ KATRINA MCCLE NNY , CLERK