Christopher Brady v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 13, 2023
Docket04-23-01005-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Christopher Brady v. the State of Texas (Christopher Brady v. the State of Texas) 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
Christopher Brady v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-23-01005-CR

Christopher BRADY, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2023CR7434 Honorable Catherine Torres-Stahl, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Beth Watkins, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 13, 2023

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

On November 14, 2023, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal that appeared to indicate

he wished to challenge his arraignment. The clerk’s record, which was filed on November 17,

2023, does not contain a judgment of conviction or other appealable order. Additionally, the

district clerk has informed this court that appellant has not yet been tried or sentenced in this case.

Generally, a criminal defendant may only appeal from a final judgment of conviction. See

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02; State v. Sellers, 790 S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1990). Because no final judgment of conviction has been signed in this case, it appears the 04-23-01005-CR

ruling, if any, appellant seeks to challenge is interlocutory. The courts of appeals lack jurisdiction

to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. Ragston

v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). On November 21, 2023, we ordered appellant

to show cause in writing by December 6, 2023 why this appeal should not be dismissed for want

of jurisdiction.

On November 30, 2023, the district clerk filed a supplemental clerk’s record that contains

an order appointing appellate counsel but does not contain a judgment of conviction or an

appealable interlocutory order. Additionally, appellant has not filed a response to our November

21 show cause order.

Because the appellate record does not contain a judgment of conviction or other appealable

order, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-

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

Related

State v. Sellers
790 S.W.2d 316 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1990)
Ragston, Joshua Dewayne
424 S.W.3d 49 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Christopher Brady v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-brady-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.