Amber Rose Redus v. the State of Texas
This text of Amber Rose Redus v. the State of Texas (Amber Rose Redus v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00755-CR
Amber Rose REDUS, Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2024-CR-009955 Honorable Laura Lee Parker, Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM
Sitting: Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice Lori Massey Brissette, Justice Adrian A. Spears II, Justice
Delivered and Filed: January 14, 2026
DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Pursuant to a plea bargain, appellant was placed on community supervision on May 23,
2025. The clerk’s record indicates that on September 25, 2025, the trial court denied a motion to
revoke appellant’s community supervision, ordered appellant “continued on community
supervision,” and released appellant “to Intermediate Sanction Facility (ISF).”
On November 19, 2025, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal that purports to challenge
a sentence imposed on September 25, 2025. Although there are judge’s notes from September 25, 04-25-00755-CR
2025, the clerk’s record does not contain an order or judgment imposing a sentence on that date.
The clerk’s record therefore appears to show that appellant wishes to challenge either the original
judgment placing her on community supervision or the order continuing her on community
supervision and ordering her released to an ISF.
This court does not have jurisdiction to consider an appeal from an order altering or
modifying the conditions of community supervision. See Davis v. State, 195 S.W.3d 708, 710–11
(Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977); Quaglia v.
State, 906 S.W.2d 112, 113 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1995, no pet.). Furthermore, appellant filed
the notice of appeal 180 days after the trial court entered the original judgment and 55 days after
it continued her on community supervision and ordered her released to an ISF. See TEX. R. APP.
P. 26.2(a) (where criminal defendant does not timely file motion for new trial, notice of appeal is
due 30 days after sentence is imposed or suspended in open court).
For these reasons, it appears that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. We therefore ordered
appellant to show cause in writing by December 31, 2025 why this appeal should not be dismissed
for lack of jurisdiction. In our order, we cautioned appellant that if she failed to respond by that
date, this appeal would be dismissed.
On January 5, 2026, appellant’s appointed counsel filed a response in which he “concede[d]
this Court has little choice but to dismiss this attempted appeal for want of jurisdiction.”
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
DO NOT PUBLISH
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Amber Rose Redus v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amber-rose-redus-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp4-2026.