Court Opinion

ID: 4512806
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-03-04 23:13:09.864494+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:37:37.258479
License: Public Domain

In The

                                 Court of Appeals

                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

                                __________________

                                NO. 09-20-00039-CR
                                __________________

                     VINCENT EUGENE FLICK, Appellant

                                          V.

                        THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

                 On Appeal from the 9th District Court
                     Montgomery County, Texas
                   Trial Cause No. 19-11-15009-CR
__________________________________________________________________

                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

      On February 5, 2020, we notified the parties that our jurisdiction was not

apparent from the notice of appeal and warned that the appeal would be dismissed

for want of jurisdiction unless we received a response showing grounds for

continuing the appeal. The notice was mailed to appellant’s address of record, but

the post office returned it as undeliverable.

                                           1
      The documents provided by the District Clerk do not show that the trial court

has signed an order that is appealable at this time. See Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d
792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (holding that intermediate appellate courts lack

jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly

granted by law). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

      APPEAL DISMISSED.

                                              PER CURIAM

Submitted on March 3, 2020
Opinion Delivered March 4, 2020
Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

                                          2