Jason Miears v. State ( 2010 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04-10-00451-CR
Jason MIEARS,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2009-CR-6566
Honorable Ron Rangel, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice
Rebecca Simmons, Justice
Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Delivered and Filed: September 15, 2010
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION
On or about September 24, 2009, the trial court signed an order denying appellant’s
motion to dismiss his appointed trial counsel in his pending criminal case. On June 11, 2010,
appellant filed a “Letter Regarding Writs Dismissing Attorney” in this court. Appellant was
notified by the court clerk that, if he intended his letter to serve as a notice of appeal, it was
defective because it failed to state the date of the judgment or order appealed from, and that the
party desires to appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(d)(2),(3). Appellant was given an opportunity
04-10-00451-CR
to cure the defect by filing a proper notice of appeal within thirty days, or the appeal would be
dismissed. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal on June 24, 2010, clarifying that he is
seeking to appeal the trial court’s September 24, 2009 interlocutory order denying his motion to
dismiss his appointed counsel.
Upon review of the record, this court determined that it does not have jurisdiction over
this appeal because appellant seeks to appeal an interlocutory, unappealable order. On August
18, 2010, this court issued an order for appellant to show cause in writing on or before August
30, 2010, why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant responded
by filing an appellant’s brief in which he asserts a right to appeal the trial court’s denial of his
motion to dismiss counsel. We disagree. The right to appeal in a criminal case is a statutorily
created right. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02 (West 2006); Bayless v. State, 91 S.W.3d
801, 805 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002); Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977).
Generally, a criminal defendant may only appeal from a final judgment. State v. Sellers, 790
S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990). The courts of appeals do not have jurisdiction to
review interlocutory orders in a criminal appeal absent express statutory authority. Apolinar v.
State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Nothing in the language of article 26.04, or
any other article, of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides an interlocutory right to appeal
from a trial court’s denial of a motion to dismiss appointed counsel. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.
ANN. art. 26.04 (West Supp. 2009). Because this court does not have jurisdiction over this
appeal of an interlocutory order, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-