### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03 - 19 - 00550 - CV

Lloyd London, Appellant

v. Ada Jemison, M.D., Psychiatrist and Any Successor, and the Attorney General of Texas, Appellee s

FROM THE 20TH DISTRI CT COURT OF MILAM CO UNTY

NO S . CV3 8 , 369 CR25,667 & CR25, 668 THE HONORABLE JOHN Y OUNGBLOOD, JUDGE PRE SIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant Lloyd London , acting pro se, has filed a notice of appeal from two medication orders, MED

- 20 54 and MED

- 2 105 , wh ich are not in the record before this Court but which London states were issued in Wilbarger County

. See Tex. Health & Safety Code § 574.106 (authorizing administration of psychoactive medication to patients who are under court order to receive inpatie n t mental

- health services). T his Court lacks jurisdiction to review

court orders from Wilbarger County. See Tex. Gov ’ t Code § 22.201(d) (listing counties within jurisdiction of Third District Court of Appeals), (h) (listing Wilbarger County as within jur i sd iction of Seventh District Court of Appeals, located in Amarillo); see also Tex. Health & Safety Code § 574.070(a) (“An appeal from an order requiring court

- ordered mental health services, or from a renewal or modification of an order, must be filed in t he court of appeals for the county in w hich the order is entered.”).2 Accordingly , this C ourt sent a notice to appellant in forming him that it a ppears that we lack jurisdiction o ver th is matter for this re ason and requesting that he f ile a respons e explai ni ng how we may exercise jurisdiction over this appeal

. In his response , appellant reference s t he Milam County Distric t Court ’s order of commitment for restoration t o competency , which was signed on Jan uary 23, 2018. 1 See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. ar t. 46B. 0 73

. To the extent that London may also be seeking to appeal the Milam County Distric t Court ’s initial order of commitment for restoration to comp etency, the district court appointed an expert to examine London and report to the court on his compet ence to st and trial. S ee id. art. 46B

. 00 5(a) ( establishing that trial court shall order expert examination to determi ne defendan t ’s competency to stand trial if after informal inquiry trial court determines that evidence exists to support finding of incom pe tency ) ; see also id. art. 46 B.021 ( allowing appointment of exp erts to conduct competency examination ). The trial court ’ s order states that the defendant appeared at the hearing in person and was repr esented by counsel. Both counsel for the State and co unsel fo r the defendant waived trial by jury and trial by the court on the issue of incompetence; neither side ’s counsel opposed a finding of incompet ence; and the trial court did not on its own motion find cause to determine that a trial was necessary to establis h incompetence. S ee id.

art. 46B

. 00 5( c) (providing that no trial is required if neither party ’s counsel requests trial, neither party ’s counsel opposes incompet ency finding, and court does not on its own motion determine trial necessary to determi ne incom pe t ency). We lack jurisdiction to review the trial court ’ s January 23, 2018 order because “ [n] either the state nor the defendant is entitled to make an

1 Lond on has been charged in Milam County with attempted aggravated kidnapping and unlawful use of a criminal instrument. London indicates in his notice of appeal that he has been commit ted to the North Texa s S tate Hos pi tal in Vernon, which is in Wilbarger County

.3

interlocutory appeal relating to a determination or ruling under Article 46B.005. ” Id.

art. 46 B.011

. F or these reasons, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a)

.

___________________________________ _______ Jeff Rose, Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices B aker and Triana Dismissed for W ant of J uri sdiction Filed: March 20, 2020