Elias Ramirez v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 24, 2020
Docket05-20-00806-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Elias Ramirez v. State (Elias Ramirez 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
Elias Ramirez v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed September 24, 2020

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00806-CR

ELIAS RAMIREZ, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F19-51891-T

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Nowell, and Evans Opinion by Justice Evans On May 7, 2019, after Elias Ramirez pleaded guilty to possession of less than

one gram of heroin, the trial court deferred adjudication of guilt, placing him on

deferred adjudication community supervision for six months. The trial court later

extended appellant’s community supervision until May 5, 2021. In July 2020, the

State filed a motion to proceed with adjudication of guilt, alleging appellant violated

various conditions of probation. Following a August 31, 2020 hearing, the trial court

denied the State’s motion, modified the terms of appellant’s community supervision, and continued him on deferred adjudication probation until May 5, 2024.

Appellant’s notice of appeal from that decision was filed on September 2, 2020.

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.

/David Evans/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 200806F.U05

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

ELIAS RAMIREZ, Appellant On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-20-00806-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. F19-51891-T. Opinion delivered by Justice Evans. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Myers and Nowell participating.

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

Judgment entered September 24, 2020.

–3–

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

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Elias Ramirez v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elias-ramirez-v-state-texapp-2020.