Court Opinion

ID: 9679907
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 07:12:40.831876+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:23.333367
License: Public Domain

COURT OF APPEALS
                                 EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
                                      EL PASO, TEXAS

 DEVORIS NEWSON,                                   §                No. 08-23-00212-CR

                                Appellant,         §                  Appeal from the

 v.                                                §            120th Judicial District Court

 THE STATE OF TEXAS,                               §              of El Paso County, Texas

                                Appellee.          §                (TC# 20190D02039)

                                  MEMORANDUM OPINION

       Appellant Devoris Newson, pro se, is attempting to appeal a pretrial bond order issued on

July 12, 2023. This appeal is before the Court on its own motion to determine whether it should

be dismissed.

       Generally, courts of appeals have jurisdiction to consider an appeal of a final judgment of

conviction when such appeal is brought by a criminal defendant. In contrast, we do not have

jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been granted by law. Ragston

v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (citing Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794

(Tex. Crim. App. 1991)). Specifically, we do not have jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory appeal

regarding excessive bail or the denial of a motion for pretrial bond reduction. Id.
        On August 4, 2023, the clerk of this Court notified appellant by letter of the Court’s intent

to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction because there did not appear to be an appealable order

on which to base our jurisdiction. The clerk informed appellant that, after ten days of the date of

the letter, the appeal would be dismissed without further notice unless appellant could show

grounds for continuing the appeal. Appellant has not filed a responsive answer to our request

following the expiration of more than ten days. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of

jurisdiction.

                                              GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

August 22, 2023

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Soto, JJ.

                                                 2