Mason Hunter Skillern v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 18, 2025
• Docket: 09-25-00127-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-25-00126-CR NO. 09-25-00127-CR NO. 09-25-00128-CR __________________

MASON HUNTER SKILLERN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 75th District Court Liberty County, Texas Trial Cause Nos. 23DC-CR-00979, 23DC-CR-00980, and 23DC-CR-01069 __________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Mason Hunter Skillern was convicted in Trial Cause Number 23DC-CR-

00978. The judgment indicates his guilty plea in that case was the product of a plea

bargain agreement where the State consented to the trial court’s consideration of the

unadjudicated offenses charged in Trial Cause Numbers 23DC-CR-00979, 23DC-

CR-00980, and 23DC-CR-01069, thereby barring prosecution for the unadjudicated

offenses. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 12.45. On April 9, 2025, Skillern filed notices

1 of appeal in all four cases. Through a notice issued by the Clerk of the Court, we

questioned whether appealable orders had been signed in Trial Cause Numbers

23DC-CR-00979, 23DC-CR-00980, and 23DC-CR-01069, and we warned the

parties that the appeals would be dismissed without further notice unless we received

a response that established our appellate jurisdiction. Neither Skillern nor the State

filed a response.

In criminal cases, the courts of appeals have jurisdiction only of those appeals

authorized by a statute, such as article 44.02, which provides that a defendant in a

criminal action has a right of appeal “under the rules hereinafter prescribed[.]” See

Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.02. Generally, an appeal may be taken by a

defendant in a criminal case only after a final conviction. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)

(establishing time for appeal by a defendant after a sentence is imposed in open court

or the trial court signs an appealable order). A court of appeals lacks appellate

jurisdiction to review an order before final judgment unless an interlocutory appeal

is expressly provided by statute. See Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2014); Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 793 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). Neither

party has shown that the trial court has imposed sentence in open court or signed an

order that may be appealed at this time. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a). Accordingly,

we dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction. See id. 43.2(f).

2 APPEALS DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on June 17, 2025 Opinion Delivered June 18, 2025 Do Not Publish

Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.