Court Opinion

ID: 9909068
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-12 15:09:48.742349+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:55.383980
License: Public Domain

Fourth Court of Appeals
                                       San Antonio, Texas
                                   MEMORANDUM OPINION
                                          No. 04-23-00887-CR

                                         Damion Bryce PEREZ,
                                              Appellant

                                                     v.

                                          The STATE of Texas,
                                                Appellee

                      From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
                                    Trial Court No. 2023CR5703
                               Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

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

Delivered and Filed: December 6, 2023

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

           On October 3, 2023 appellant filed his notice of appeal stating his intent to appeal a

sentence imposed on September 11, 2023. A review of the clerk’s record showed it did not include

any judgment entered on that date. It did, however, include a September 25, 2023 motion to dismiss

the criminal action, filed by the Bexar County district attorney. The trial court granted the motion

the same day and dismissed the criminal action.

           As a general rule, a criminal defendant’s right of appeal is limited to an appeal from a final

judgment of conviction. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 44.02; see also State v. Sellers, 790
                                                                                      04-23-00887-CR

S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990) (“A defendant’s general right to appeal under [article

44.02] and its predecessors has always been limited to appeal from a ‘final judgment,’ though the

statute does not contain this limitation on its face.”). Moreover, “[t]he courts of appeals do not

have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted

by law.” Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). And a criminal defendant

is not permitted to appeal a trial court’s order dismissing a charge against him. See Bohannan v.

State, 352 S.W.3d 47, 48 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011, pet. ref’d) (dismissing for lack of

jurisdiction a defendant’s appeal from an order dismissing the criminal charges filed against him).

       Because it appeared we do not have jurisdiction to consider this appeal, we ordered

appellant to show cause no later than November 2, 2023 why this appeal should not be dismissed

for lack of jurisdiction. We admonished appellant that if he failed to satisfactorily respond to this

order within the time provided, the appeal would be dismissed. Appellant has not filed a response.

       Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

                                                  PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

                                                -2-