Court Opinion

ID: 4417848
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-07-18 14:53:38.741152+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:46:54.458106
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-19-00272-CR

                           COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

LEE GARNER,                                                              Appellant,

                                         v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                 Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

              On appeal from the 24th District Court
                   of Calhoun County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Benavides and Longoria
         Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras

      Appellant Lee Garner, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal from cause

number 88-4-3684 in the District Court of Calhoun County, Texas. Appellant’s notice of

appeal did not specify that he was appealing from a judgment or other appealable order

and stated only that he wished to appeal his “case.” See generally TEX. R. APP. P.
25.2(c)(2).

       On June 12, 2019, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that

there was not a final, appealable judgment in this case and requested correction of this

defect if it could be done.    The Clerk notified appellant that the appeal would be

dismissed if the defect was not cured. Appellant filed a pro se response to the Court’s

directive, but his response fails to provide grounds to continue the appeal.

       In Texas, appeals in criminal cases are permitted only when they are specifically

authorized by statute. State ex rel. Lykos, 330 S.W.3d 904, 915 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011);

see TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02. Generally, a state appellate court only has

jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant where there has been a final

judgment of conviction. Workman v. State, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961);

Ex parte Ragston, 402 S.W.3d 472, 477 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2013), aff'd sub

nom. Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); McKown v. State, 915
S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). The courts of appeals do not

have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders in a criminal appeal absent express

statutory authority. Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991);

Bridle v. State, 16 S.W.3d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2000, no pet.). Exceptions

to the general rule include: (1) certain appeals while on deferred adjudication community

supervision, Kirk v. State, 942 S.W.2d 624, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); (2) appeals from

the denial of a motion to reduce bond, TEX. R. APP. P. 31.1; McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161;

and (3) certain appeals from the denial of habeas corpus relief, Wright v. State, 969
S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. See

also Bridle, 16 S.W.3d at 908 n.1.

                                            2
      The Court, having examined and fully considered the notice of appeal and the

matter before the Court, is of the opinion that there is not a current appealable order and

this Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter. And, to the extent that appellant may be

attempting to appeal his judgment of conviction and sentence rendered on August 1,

1988, we lack jurisdiction over the untimely appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1),(2); Slaton

v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519,

522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Pickens v. State, 105 S.W.3d 746, 748 (Tex. App.—Austin

2003, no pet.).

      We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. All pending motions, if any, are

likewise DISMISSED.

                                                               DORI CONTRERAS
                                                               Chief Justice

Do not publish.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the
18th day of July, 2019.

                                            3