Brandon Michael Packer v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 18, 2020
Docket05-20-00742-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Brandon Michael Packer v. State (Brandon Michael Packer v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brandon Michael Packer v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed September 18, 2020

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00742-CR

BRANDON MICHAEL PACKER, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F16-40480-T

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Osborne, and Partida-Kipness Opinion by Justice Osborne On July 28, 2017, after Brandon Michael Packer pleaded guilty to possession

of less than one gram of heroin, the trial court deferred adjudication of guilt and

placed appellant on deferred adjudication probation for two years. The trial court

later extended appellant’s community supervision until July 27, 2021. On June 4,

2020, the State filed a motion to proceed with adjudication of guilt, alleging

appellant violated various conditions of probation. Following a July 13, 2020

hearing, the trial court denied the State’s motion and continued appellant on deferred adjudication probation. Appellant’s notice of appeal from that decision was filed in

this Court on August 14, 2020.

As a general rule, an appellate court may consider appeals by criminal

defendants only after conviction. Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—

Dallas 1998, no pet.). With regard to deferred adjudication, the Texas Legislature

has authorized appeal of only two types of orders: (1) an order granting deferred

adjudication, and (2) an order imposing punishment accompanying an adjudication

of guilt. Davis v. State, 195 S.W.3d 708, 711 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Orders

modifying the terms or conditions of deferred adjudication are not in themselves

appealable. Id.

Here, there is no judgment of conviction; rather, the trial court continued

appellant on deferred adjudication. Under these circumstances, we do not have

jurisdiction. See id.

We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

/Leslie Osborne/ LESLIE OSBORNE Do Not Publish JUSTICE TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 200742F.U05

–2– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

BRANDON MICHAEL PACKER, On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial Appellant District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F16-40480-T. No. 05-20-00742-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Osborne. Justices Schenck and THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Partida-Kipness participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Judgment entered September 18, 2020

–3–

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Davis v. State
195 S.W.3d 708 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Wright v. State
969 S.W.2d 588 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Brandon Michael Packer v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brandon-michael-packer-v-state-texapp-2020.