Micky Don Wade v. State

Opinion

In the

Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-20-00125-CR

No. 02-20-00126-CR

No. 02-20-00127-CR

___________________________

MICKY DON WADE, Appellant V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the 89th District Court Wichita County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. 59,736-C; 59,641-C; 59,642-C*1-5

Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Micky Don Wade, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal in each of these cases attempting to challenge the trial court’s September 1, 2020 interlocutory order, in which the trial court “decline[d] to consider the merits of any of Defendant’s pro se filings or to take any action with respect to them.” Generally, we have jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant only where there has been a final judgment of conviction. See Bridle v. State, 16 S.W.3d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2000, no pet.) (per curiam); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.) (per curiam). Accordingly, we sent Wade a letter expressing our concern that we do not have jurisdiction over these appeals because the trial court has not entered any appealable orders. We informed Wade that unless he or any other party desiring to continue the appeals filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeals, we would dismiss them. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3. Although Wade filed a response, it does not show grounds for continuing these appeals. We therefore dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

Per Curiam

Do Not Publish Tex.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

Delivered: October 1, 2020