Cedric Charles Figgs v. State ( 2011 )

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 16, 2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

___________________

NO. 14-11-00441-CR

___________________

CEDRIC CHARLES FIGGS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 21st District Court

Washington County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 15,824

MEMORANDUM  OPINION

This is an attempted appeal from the denial of appellant’s “motion to dismiss prosecution.”  The record does not contain a final judgment of conviction.  The trial court entered a certification of defendant’s right of appeal in which the court certified that “[t]here being no final judgment or final order signed by this [court] and there being no Interlocutory right to appeal, the [court] finds Defendant has no right to appeal at this time.”  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2) and (d).  The record supports the trial court’s certification.  See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 

Generally, an appellate court has jurisdiction only to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant where there has been a final judgment of conviction.  Workman v. State, 170 Tex. Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161  (Tex. App.CFort Worth 1996, no pet.).  Exceptions include: (1) certain appeals while on deferred adjudication community supervision, Kirk v. State, 942 S.W.2d 624, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); (2) appeals from the denial of a motion to reduce bond, Tex. R. App. P. 31.1; McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161; and (3) certain appeals from the denial of habeas corpus relief, Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.CDallas 1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. 

The denial of a motion to dismiss is not a separately appealable order.  Because we have no jurisdiction, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Anderson, Brown, and Christopher.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).