Joseph K. Dingler v. State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 26, 2023
• Docket: 05-22-01255-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed January 26, 2023

S In the Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-01254-CR No. 05-22-01255-CR No. 05-22-01256-CR No. 05-22-01257-CR

JOSEPH K. DINGLER, Appellant V. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Rockwall County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. CR19-1769, CR 19-1770, CR19-1771, CR 19-1772

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Carlyle, Goldstein, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Carlyle Joseph K. Dingler filed a pro se notice of appeal in these cases. The notice of

appeal did not identify any judgments or other appealable orders. It appears from the

notice of appeal that appellant is complaining about the trial court’s refusal to remove

his appointed attorney and appoint him other counsel and complaining of ineffective

assistance of counsel. The Rockwall County Clerk filed a letter with this Court

stating, “there is not a judgment in any of the cases identified above due to his not

appearing for the Pre-Trial or the Jury Trial.” The court reporter filed a letter stating, “These cases were set for jury trial on August 23, 2022, and the defendant failed to

appear.” We sent appellant a letter stating we questioned our jurisdiction as there did

not appear to be a final judgment or other appealable order in these case. We asked

appellant to file a response identifying any judgment or other appealable order in

these cases. Appellant filed a response, which discussed many issues, but it did not

identify any judgments or other appealable orders in the cases. Much of appellant’s

response concerned the lack of rulings by the trial court.

We have no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal unless the trial court has entered

a judgment or appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(b), 26.2(a)(1); State v.

Sanavongxay, 407 S.W.3d 252, 259 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012); Henderson v. State, 153

S.W.3d 735, 735–36 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2005, no pet.). Because appellant has not

identified any judgment or other appealable order before this Court, we conclude we

lack jurisdiction over these appeals. Accordingly, we dismiss these appeals for lack

of jurisdiction.

/Cory L. Carlyle CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 221254F.U05

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

JOSEPH K. DINGLER, Appellant On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2, Rockwall County, Texas No. 05-22-01254-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. CR19-1769. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Goldstein and Kennedy participating.

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

Judgment entered January 26, 2023

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

JOSEPH K. DINGLER, Appellant On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2, Rockwall County, Texas No. 05-22-01255-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. CR19-1770. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Goldstein and Kennedy participating.

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

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

JOSEPH K. DINGLER, Appellant On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2, Rockwall County, Texas No. 05-22-01256-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. CR19-1771. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Goldstein and Kennedy participating.

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

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

JOSEPH K. DINGLER, Appellant On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2, Rockwall County, Texas No. 05-22-01257-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. CR19-1772. Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Justices Goldstein and Kennedy participating.

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

–6–