Court Opinion

ID: 9440265
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 08:08:21.834454+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:18.809230
License: Public Domain

In The
                                Court of Appeals
                       Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

                                       No. 07-23-00223-CR

                           JASON WOODY CLARK, APPELLANT

                                                V.

                            THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

                             On Appeal from the 31st District Court
                                   Wheeler County, Texas
                 Trial Court No. 5613, Honorable Steven R. Emmert, Presiding

                                          July 27, 2023
                               MEMORANDUM OPINION
                  Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and YARBROUGH, JJ.

       Appellant, Jason Woody Clark, is under indictment for aggravated assault on a

public servant.1 Appellant filed a notice of appeal, pro se, from the trial court’s purported

order declaring him incompetent to stand trial and from an order permitting his appointed

counsel to withdraw. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

       1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(b)(2)(B).
       We have jurisdiction in a criminal case to consider an appeal from a judgment of

guilt or where jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. See Abbott v. State, 271

S.W.3d 694, 697–98 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). An order declaring a defendant incompetent

to stand trial or permitting a defendant’s counsel to withdraw is neither a judgment of guilt

nor an appealable order. See Grant v. State, No. 01-21-00340-CR, 2021 Tex. App. LEXIS

8307, at *3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 14, 2021, pet. ref’d) (per curiam) (mem.

op., not designated for publication) (finding no interlocutory appeal from an order

declaring appellant incompetent to stand trial); Webb v. State, No. 13-13-00075-CR, 2013

Tex. App. LEXIS 5082, at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Apr. 25, 2013, no pet.) (per

curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (finding no interlocutory appeal from

an order permitting counsel to withdraw).

       By letter of July 11, 2023, we directed Appellant to show how we have jurisdiction

over this appeal. Appellant filed a response but failed to show grounds for continuing the

appeal.

       Because Appellant has not presented this Court with a judgment or appealable

order, we dismiss his appeal for want of jurisdiction.

                                                         Per Curiam

Do not publish.

                                             2