Daniel Shaw v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 27, 2020
Docket05-19-01406-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Daniel Shaw v. State (Daniel Shaw 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
Daniel Shaw v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed January 27, 2020

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-19-01406-CR

DANIEL SHAW, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F19-56007-R

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Bridges, Whitehill, and Nowell Opinion by Justice Whitehill Daniel Shaw filed a pro se notice of appeal on November 14, 2019. The clerk’s record,

filed December 23, 2019, shows appellant was indicted for evading arrest. On October 24, 2019,

the State filed a motion to dismiss prosecution which the trial court granted. Thus, it appears

appellant is trying to appeal the trial court’s order dismissing the case.

In Texas, appeals in criminal cases are permitted only when they are authorized by statute.

State ex rel. Lykos, 330 S.W.3d 904, 915 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011); see TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC.

ANN. art. 44.02. Generally, a criminal defendant may only appeal from a final judgment. See State

v. Sellers, 790 S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990). A “final judgment” is a “final

judgment of conviction,” which is defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure as “the written

declaration of the court signed by the trial judge and entered of record showing the conviction or acquittal of the defendant.” Raley v. State, 441 S.W.3d 647, 650 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.]

2014, pet ref’d); TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.01, § 1. Appellant was not convicted or

acquitted in trial court cause number F19-56007-R. Rather, the State filed a motion to dismiss the

case against him which the trial court granted.

Because this appeal does not fall within the exceptions to the general rule that appeal may

be taken only from a final judgment of conviction, we conclude we have no jurisdiction.

We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

/Bill Whitehill/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 191406F.U05

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

DANIEL SHAW, Appellant On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-19-01406-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F19-56007-R. Opinion delivered by Justice Whitehill. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Bridges and Nowell participating.

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

Judgment entered January 27, 2020.

–3–

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)
State Ex Rel. Lykos v. Fine
330 S.W.3d 904 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2011)
Johnnie Lee Raley v. State of Texas
441 S.W.3d 647 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Daniel Shaw v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-shaw-v-state-texapp-2020.