Erlinda Gonzales Lozano v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 3, 2025
• Docket: 04-25-00659-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00659-CR

Erlinda Gonzales LOZANO, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2023-CR-6646 Honorable Jennifer Peña, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice Lori Massey Brissette, Justice Adrian A. Spears II, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 3, 2025

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Pursuant to a plea bargain, appellant was placed on deferred adjudication community

supervision on May 12, 2025. On August 14, 2025, the trial court signed an “Order Amending

Conditions of Community Supervision.” On October 7, 2025, appellant filed a pro se notice of

appeal that purports to challenge a sentence imposed on September 11, 2025. Because the clerk’s

record does not indicate that the trial court imposed a sentence on that date, it appears that appellant 04-25-00659-CR

wishes to challenge either the original order of deferred adjudication or the amendment of

community supervision.

This court does not have jurisdiction to consider an appeal from an order altering or

modifying the conditions of community supervision. See Davis v. State, 195 S.W.3d 708, 710–11

(Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977); Quaglia v.

State, 906 S.W.2d 112, 113 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1995, no pet.). Furthermore, appellant filed

the notice of appeal 148 days after the trial court entered the order of deferred adjudication and 54

days after it amended the terms of community supervision. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a) (where

criminal defendant does not timely file motion for new trial, notice of appeal is due 30 days after

sentence is imposed or suspended in open court).

On October 20, 2025, we ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should

not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. On November 12, 2025, appellant’s appointed counsel

filed a response conceding that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. We therefore dismiss the

appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-