James Riley Lemons v. State ( 2021 )

IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-21-00060-CR
No. 10-21-00061-CR
No. 10-21-00062-CR
No. 10-21-00063-CR
No. 10-21-00064-CR
No. 10-21-00065-CR
JAMES RILEY LEMONS,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
From the 278th District Court
Walker County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 29221; 29309;
29311; 29313; 29315; and 29317
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 12, 2021, James Riley Lemons filed a notice of appeal with the trial court
clerk in each of the above numbered cases, stating that he desires to appeal from the
March 4, 2021 dismissal of his motion for speedy trial. Lemons’ notice of appeal and the
docketing statement, filed on April 7, 2021, notes that he is also challenging the denial of
his request for a personal recognizance bond and for default judgment. (It is unclear
whether Lemons is appealing one or multiple orders.) Lemons has not been convicted in
any of these cases; thus, these appeals are interlocutory. We will dismiss these appeals
for want of jurisdiction.
An appellate court has jurisdiction over criminal appeals only when expressly
granted by law. See Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008)
(standard for determining jurisdiction is not whether appeal precluded by law but
whether appeal authorized by law). Article 44.02 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
provides, “A defendant in any criminal action has the right of appeal under the rules
hereinafter prescribed. . . .” TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02. This statutory right
has been interpreted as allowing an appeal only from a final judgment. See Abbott, 694
S.W.3d at 697 n.8 (citing State v. Sellers, 790 S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990)).
The courts of appeals, therefore, “do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders
unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law.” Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d
792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
The law is clear in Texas that we have no jurisdiction of an interlocutory appeal of
the dismissal or denial of a motion for speedy trial. See Ex parte Delbert, 582 S.W.2d 145,
146 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979) (citing Ordunez v. Bean, 579 S.W.2d 911, 913-14
(Tex. Crim. App. 1979)); see also United States v. MacDonald, 435 U.S. 850, 862, 98 S. Ct.
1547, 1553, 56 L. Ed. 2d 18 (1978) (“Allowing an exception to the rule against pretrial
appeals in criminal cases for speedy trial claims would threaten precisely the values
manifested in the Speedy Trial Clause.”); Raines v. State, No. 10-20-00167-CR, No. 10-20-
Lemons v. State Page 2
00168-CR, No. 10-20-00169-CR, No. 10-20-00170-CR, No. 10-20-00171-CR, No. 10-20-
00172-CR, 2020 WL 4062738, at *1 (Tex. App.—Waco July 9, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op., not
designated for publication). We also lack jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal
regarding excessive bail or the denial of bail. See Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2014). Finally, we have not found any rule or any statutory or constitutional
provision that would authorize Lemons’ appeal from the trial court’s interlocutory order
denying his motion for a default judgment. Accordingly, because Lemons’ appeal is not
from a judgment of conviction or an appealable interlocutory order, we have no
jurisdiction. See id. For the foregoing reasons, each of these appeals is dismissed.
Notwithstanding that we are dismissing these appeals, Lemons may file a motion
for rehearing with this Court within fifteen (15) days after the judgment of this Court is
rendered. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1. If Lemons desires to have the decision of this Court
reviewed by filing a petition for discretionary review, that petition must be filed with the
Court of Criminal Appeals within thirty (30) days after either the day this Court’s
judgment is rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing is overruled by this
Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2(a).
MATT JOHNSON
Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Neill, and
Justice Johnson
Dismissed
Opinion delivered and filed April 28, 2021
Do not publish
[CR25]
Lemons v. State Page 3