Dreyvon a Anderson-Sanders v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: August 29, 2024
• Docket: 01-24-00545-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued August 29, 2024

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00545-CR ——————————— DREYVON A. ANDERSON-SANDERS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 179th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 1856052

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Dreyvon A. Anderson-Sanders, was indicted for the felony offense

of aggravated assault1 and released on a $50,000 bond. On March 14, 2024, the

State filed a “Motion to Revoke Bond and Deny Bail,” alleging that appellant failed

1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(b)(1). to comply with certain conditions of bond set by the trial court. Following a hearing,

on April 3, 2024, the trial court granted the State’s motion, revoking appellant’s bond

and denying bail pursuant to Article I, Section 11b of the Texas Constitution.2

On June 28, 2024, appellant filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s April

3, 2024 order granting the State’s motion to revoke bond and deny bail. We dismiss

the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

The right to appeal in criminal cases is conferred by statute, and a party may

only appeal from a judgment of conviction or an interlocutory order as authorized

by statute. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02; TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2);

Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). A court of appeals

does not have jurisdiction to review an interlocutory order in a criminal case when

jurisdiction has not been expressly granted by statute. See Ragston, 424 S.W.3d at

52; see also State ex rel. Lykos v. Fine, 330 S.W.3d 904, 915 (Tex. Crim. App.

2011) (explaining appeals “in a criminal case are permitted only when they are

specifically authorized by statute”); Ex parte Doster, 303 S.W.3d 720, 724 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2010) (noting “an interlocutory appeal is an extraordinary remedy”).

2 See TEX. CONST. art. I, § 11b (“Any person who is accused in this state of a felony or an offense involving family violence, who is released on bail pending trial, and whose bail is subsequently revoked or forfeited for a violation of a condition of release may be denied bail pending trial if a judge or magistrate in this state determines by a preponderance of the evidence at a subsequent hearing that the person violated a condition of release related to the safety of a victim of the alleged offense or to the safety of the community.”).

2 An order revoking a defendant’s bond is not an order from which the Texas

Legislature has authorized an appeal. See Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589

(Tex. App.—Dallas 1998, no pet.); see also Grant v. State, No. 01-21-00340-CR,

2021 WL 4780066, at *2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 14, 2021, pet. ref’d)

(mem. op., not designated for publication) (dismissing appeal from order revoking

bond for lack of jurisdiction). Because the order appellant seeks to appeal is not an

appealable interlocutory order, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal.

Additionally, while the trial court’s April 3, 2024 order is not an appealable

order, even assuming an appeal could be taken, this Court would lack jurisdiction

over the appeal because we cannot exercise jurisdiction over an appeal without a

timely filed notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a); Castillo v. State, 369

S.W.3d 196, 198 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1996); Lair v. State, 321 S.W.3d 158, 159 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st

Dist.] 2010, pet. ref’d). A defendant’s notice of appeal is timely if it is filed within

thirty days after the date the trial court enters an appealable order. TEX. R. APP. P.

26.2(a); see also Bayless v. State, 91 S.W.3d 801, 806 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002). The

time for filing a notice of appeal can also be extended if, within fifteen days of the

deadline for filing the notice of appeal, a defendant files his notice of appeal in the

trial court and a motion for extension of time that complies with Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 10.5(b) in the appellate court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 26.3;

3 Lair, 321 S.W.3d at 159; see also Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522 (requiring both notice

of appeal and motion for extension to be filed within fifteen days of original due date

for notice of appeal).

The order appellant seeks to appeal was entered on April 3, 2024.

Accordingly, any notice of appeal was due to be filed with the trial court on or before

May 3, 2024. Appellant’s June 28, 2024 notice of appeal was therefore not timely.

This Court therefore lacks jurisdiction to address the merits of appellant’s appeal

and can take no other action than to dismiss the appeal. See Slaton v. State, 981

S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).

Because the order granting the State’s motion to revoke bond and deny bail is

not an appealable order, and because appellant failed to timely file his notice of

appeal, we hold that we lack jurisdiction over the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss

the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). We dismiss any

pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Guerra, and Farris.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).