Court Opinion

ID: 9896725
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-14 15:11:18.407369+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:21.720083
License: Public Domain

Fourth Court of Appeals
                                    San Antonio, Texas
                                MEMORANDUM OPINION
                                        No. 04-23-00839-CR

                                          Kevin ODELL,
                                            Appellant

                                                 v.

                                       The STATE of Texas,
                                             Appellee

                     From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
                                   Trial Court No. 2022CR5901
                           Honorable Andrew Carruthers, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting:         Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
                 Irene Rios, Justice
                 Beth Watkins, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 8, 2023

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

           On September 8, 2023, appellant filed a “Motion to Appeal Decision on Psychological

Evaluation.” A review of the record shows appellant moved for a psychiatric examination on

March 30, 2023. On May 23, 2023, appellant was ordered to submit to an examination for the

purpose of determining his competency to stand trial. On July 21, 2023, the trial court signed an

agreed judgment of competency to stand trial which provides “[c]ounsel for the Defendant and

Counsel for the State agreed that the defendant is presently competent to stand trial,” and the trial

court reviewed the competency evaluation and concluded appellant is “competent to stand trial.”
                                                                                       04-23-00839-CR

Appellant now seeks to appeal the agreed judgment of competency to stand trial. The agreed

judgment of competency to stand trial is not an appealable order. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art.

46B.011 (“Neither the state nor the defendant is entitled to make an interlocutory appeal relating

to a determination or ruling under Article 46B.005.”). We therefore ordered appellant to show

cause in writing no later than October 6, 2023 why this court should not dismiss this appeal for

lack of jurisdiction. We admonished appellant that if he failed to file a timely response, this appeal

may be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant has not filed a response.

       Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

                                                   PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

                                                 -2-