Alan D. Frey III v. the State of Texas

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00093-CR

Alan D. FREY III, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the Criminal District Court, Magistrate Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2025CR002806 Honorable Miguel Najera, Judge Presiding

Sitting: Adrian A. Spears II, Justice H. Todd McCray, Justice Velia J. Meza, Justice

Delivered and Filed: April 9, 2025

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Alan D. Frey III filed a pro se notice of appeal. The clerk’s record does not contain a final

judgment of conviction. The only order contained in the clerk’s record is a magistrate’s order

setting Frey’s bond at $15,000.00. 1 Thus, it appears that Frey is attempting to appeal from an

interlocutory order.

1 The supplemental clerk’s record shows after the magistrate set Frey’s bond, Frey was indicted for theft of property and unauthorized use of a vehicle. 04-25-00093-CR

“The courts of appeals 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). An order setting bond is not an appealable interlocutory order. Sanchez v. State,

340 S.W.3d 848, 849 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011, no pet.) (concluding pretrial order setting

bond amount was not appealable and dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction); McCarver v. State,

257 S.W.3d 512, 515 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2008, no pet.) (concluding Legislature has not

provided courts of appeals with jurisdiction over “direct appeal[s] from interlocutory pretrial

orders involving bail.”); see also Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014)

(“There is no constitutional or statutory authority granting the courts of appeals jurisdiction to hear

interlocutory appeals regarding excessive bail or the denial of bail.”).

We ordered Frey to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack

of jurisdiction; however, Frey did not respond. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of

jurisdiction.

Do Not Publish

-2-