Earl Andrew Castighanie v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided January 20, 2021·No. 05-20-00901-CR·Published

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed January 20, 2021

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00901-CR

EARL ANDREW CASTIGHANIE a/k/a EMIL ANDREW CASTIGHANIE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F20-52937-T

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Osborne, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Osborne On June 8, 2020, Earl Andrew Castighanie a/k/a Emil Andrew Castighanie

pleaded guilty under an agreement with the State to possession with intent to deliver

less than one gram of 5-FLUORO MDMB-PICA. The trial court deferred

adjudication of guilt, placing him on deferred adjudication community supervision

for three years. On July 13, 2020, the State filed a motion to proceed with

adjudication of guilt, alleging appellant violated various conditions of probation.

Following a 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 on September 30, 2020. On January 4, 2021, we notified the

parties that, after reviewing the clerk’s record, it appeared the Court lacked

jurisdiction and asked for letter briefs. Both appellant and the State filed letter briefs,

agreeing that the Court lacked jurisdiction.

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/Leslie Osborne/ LESLIE OSBORNE JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 200901F.U05

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

EARL ANDREW CASTIGHANIE, On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial Appellant District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F20-52937-T. No. 05-20-00901-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Osborne. Justices Myers and Carlyle THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee participating.

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

Judgment entered January 20, 2021

–3–

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

Earl Andrew Castighanie v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2021).

Earl Andrew Castighanie v. State (Earl Andrew Castighanie v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)