Janine Charboneau v. State

Opinion

1)ismissed and Opinion IIled February 20, 2013

In The Qtntrt uf Apuah 2f11t1! lutrirt tif rxa at la11as No. 05- 13-00203-CR

JANINE JOYCE CHARBONEAU, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 6 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 006-80751-2012

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang-Miers, Murphy, and Fillmore Opinion by Justice Fillmore Janine Joyce Charboneau is charged with the misdemeanor offense of cruelty to animals.

On January 9, 2013, the trial court denied appellant’s “motion to reopen and reconsideration of

defendant’s the [sici motion to suppress and motion to quash the complaint and motion to

dismiss.” On January 28, 2013, appellant, who is representing herself, filed a “notice of

interlocutory appeal and notice of writ of mandamus.” We conclude we lack jurisdiction over

the appeal.

The right to appeal in a criminal case is a statutorily created right. See McKinnev v. State,

207 S.W.3d 366, 374 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Griffin v. State, 145 S.W.3d 645, 646 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2004). See also TEx. CODE CRIM. P. 44.02 (West 2006) (providing right of appeal for

defendant); TEx. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2) (rules for appeal by defendant). As a general rule, appellate courts may consider aiak h criminal defendants only alter conviction. Wright ‘.

State. 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1998. no pet.). Intermediate appellate courts

have no jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders absent express authority. Ev park’ Apolmar.

820 S.W2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim, App. 1991); Wright, 969 S.W2d at 598.

Orders denying pretrial motions to suppress. quash a complaint, and dismiss are not

appealable interlocutory orders. See Wright, 969 S.W.2d at 598 (identifying types of appealable

interlocutory orders). Therel’ore, we have no jurisdiction over this appeal.’

We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

ROBERT M. FILLMORE JUSTICE

Do Not Publish TEx. R. App. P. 47

I 30203F.U05

We decline to treat the document as a petition for writ of mandamus because it does not comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52, See TEX. R. APP. P. 52. Qntirt of Aiak JFiftti Mtrirt of rxa at Thifta JUDGMENT

JANINE JOYCE CHARBONEAU, On Appeal from the County Court at Law Appellant No, 6, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 006-80751-2012. No. 05-13-00203-CR Opinion delivered by Justice Fillmore, Justices Lang-Miers and Murphy THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee participating.

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

th 20 Judgment entered this day of February, 2013.

I .