Fitch, Bonnie v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 18, 2004
• Docket: 14-04-00096-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Dismissed and Opinion filed March 18, 2004

Dismissed and Opinion filed March 18, 2004.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-04-00096-CR

BONNIE R. FITCH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 1

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 5394

O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of not guilty to failure to stop at a clearly marked stop line while facing a red light.  She was convicted and the municipal court assessed a fine of $100.  Appellant appealed her conviction to the County Criminal Court at Law No. 1, which affirmed her conviction.  Because we lack jurisdiction, we dismiss the appeal.

In her appeal to the county court at law, appellant contended (1) the evidence was insufficient to show a clearly marked stop line, (2) the evidence was insufficient to show the traffic light was working properly, and (3) the trial court erred in not defining the term, Astop line,@ for the jury.  The county court at law affirmed the municipal court conviction.  Unless the sole issue is a constitutional one, the court of appeals only has jurisdiction over an appeal from a municipal conviction if (1) the fine assessed against the defendant exceeds $100 and (2) the municipal court judgment is affirmed by the county criminal court at law.  Tex. Gov=t Code Ann. ' 30.00688; Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 4.03. 

Article 4.03 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure grants the court of appeals appellate jurisdiction notwithstanding the amount of the fine if the sole issue is the constitutionality of the statute or ordinance on which the conviction is based.  Appellant has raised no such constitutional issue here.  Therefore, this court lacks jurisdiction because the monetary fine does not exceed $100.  See Boyd v. State, 11 S.W.3d 324, 325 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 1999, no pet.).

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Opinion filed March 18, 2004.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Anderson, and Hudson.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).