Cedrick Deshaun Alexander v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 25, 2025
• Docket: 09-25-00144-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-25-00144-CR __________________

CEDRICK DESHAUN ALEXANDER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 9th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 24-08-12328 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Cedrick Deshaun Alexander filed a pro se notice of appeal that indicated he

seeks to appeal an indictment pre-trial. On May 5, 2025, we notified the parties that

it appears the matter being appealed is neither a final judgment nor an appealable

order. We asked the parties to file written responses identifying the particular statute

or rule authorizing an appeal at this time, and we warned the parties that we would

dismiss the appeal unless we received a response that showed that we have

jurisdiction over an appeal of this case at this time. On May 12, 2025, the trial court

1 appointed new counsel to represent Alexander in Trial Cause Number 24-08-12328.

On May 23, 2025, we re-issued the notice to include Alexander’s new attorney.

Neither of the parties filed a response.

Generally, an appeal may be taken by a defendant in a criminal case only after

a final conviction. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a) (establishing time for appeal by a

defendant after a sentence is imposed in open court or the trial court signs an

appealable order). In criminal cases, the courts of appeals have jurisdiction only of

those appeals authorized by a statute. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.02;

Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 697 n.8 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (A defendant’s

general right to appeal under Article 44.02 has always been limited to appeal from a

final judgment.). A court of appeals lacks appellate jurisdiction to review an order

before final judgment unless an interlocutory appeal is expressly provided by statute.

See Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Neither of the

parties have shown that the trial court has imposed sentence in open court or signed

an order that may be appealed at this time. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a). Accordingly,

we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See id. 43.2(f).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM Submitted on June 24, 2025 Opinion Delivered June 25, 2025 Do Not Publish

Before Johnson, Wright and Chambers, JJ. 2