Rachel Nicole Spelman v. the State of Texas
This text of Rachel Nicole Spelman v. the State of Texas (Rachel Nicole Spelman 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.
Opinion
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________
No. 02-24-00341-CR ___________________________
RACHEL NICOLE SPELMAN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 432nd District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1665014
Before Womack, Wallach, and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Rachel Nicole Spelman filed a notice of appeal expressing her intent
to appeal the trial court’s “Orders, Rulings and/or Judgements [sic] of August 26th –
29th, as well as any other rulings subsumed therein.” Based on our review of
Spelman’s notice of appeal and other documents received from the trial court, it did
not appear to us that Spelman was appealing from a judgment of conviction.1
Accordingly, on September 20, 2024, we notified Spelman of our concern that
we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. We explained that in criminal cases, our
jurisdiction is generally limited to appeals from judgments of conviction. See McKown
v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.) (per curiam).
We warned Spelman that unless she or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed
a response by September 30, 2024, showing grounds for continuing the appeal, we
could dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f), 44.3.
We later received notice that on October 4, 2024, the trial court had signed an
order disqualifying Spelman’s counsel. Subsequently, we received notice that Spelman
had retained new counsel to represent her. Accordingly, on October 23, 2024, we
sent Spelman a second letter—addressed to her newly-retained counsel—regarding
our concern that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. We again explained that our
1 Indeed, in the trial court’s certification of Spelman’s right of appeal that was attached to her notice of appeal, the trial court stated, “The defendant has NO right of appeal. -- Case is pending.”
2 jurisdiction is generally limited to appeals from judgments of conviction. See McKown,
915 S.W.2d at 161. We warned Spelman that unless she or any party desiring to
continue the appeal filed a response by November 4, 2024, showing grounds for
continuing the appeal, we could dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App.
P. 43.2(f), 44.3.
Spelman has not filed a response to either of our letters expressing our
jurisdictional concern. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161.
/s/ Dana Womack
Dana Womack Justice
Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: December 5, 2024
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Rachel Nicole Spelman v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rachel-nicole-spelman-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.