Jason Woody Clark v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 27, 2023
Docket07-23-00223-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Jason Woody Clark v. the State of Texas (Jason Woody Clark v. the State of Texas) 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
Jason Woody Clark v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-23-00223-CR

JASON WOODY CLARK, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

On Appeal from the 31st District Court Wheeler County, Texas Trial Court No. 5613, Honorable Steven R. Emmert, Presiding

July 27, 2023 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and YARBROUGH, JJ.

Appellant, Jason Woody Clark, is under indictment for aggravated assault on a

public servant.1 Appellant filed a notice of appeal, pro se, from the trial court’s purported

order declaring him incompetent to stand trial and from an order permitting his appointed

counsel to withdraw. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(b)(2)(B). We have jurisdiction in a criminal case to consider an appeal from a judgment of

guilt or where jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. See Abbott v. State, 271

S.W.3d 694, 697–98 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). An order declaring a defendant incompetent

to stand trial or permitting a defendant’s counsel to withdraw is neither a judgment of guilt

nor an appealable order. See Grant v. State, No. 01-21-00340-CR, 2021 Tex. App. LEXIS

8307, at *3 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 14, 2021, pet. ref’d) (per curiam) (mem.

op., not designated for publication) (finding no interlocutory appeal from an order

declaring appellant incompetent to stand trial); Webb v. State, No. 13-13-00075-CR, 2013

Tex. App. LEXIS 5082, at *3 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi Apr. 25, 2013, no pet.) (per

curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (finding no interlocutory appeal from

an order permitting counsel to withdraw).

By letter of July 11, 2023, we directed Appellant to show how we have jurisdiction

over this appeal. Appellant filed a response but failed to show grounds for continuing the

appeal.

Because Appellant has not presented this Court with a judgment or appealable

order, we dismiss his appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.

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

Related

Abbott v. State
271 S.W.3d 694 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jason Woody Clark v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jason-woody-clark-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.