Vincent Eugene Flick v. State
This text of Vincent Eugene Flick v. State (Vincent Eugene Flick v. State) 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
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
__________________
NO. 09-20-00039-CR __________________
VINCENT EUGENE FLICK, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
__________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 9th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 19-11-15009-CR __________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On February 5, 2020, we notified the parties that our jurisdiction was not
apparent from the notice of appeal and warned that the appeal would be dismissed
for want of jurisdiction unless we received a response showing grounds for
continuing the appeal. The notice was mailed to appellant’s address of record, but
the post office returned it as undeliverable.
1 The documents provided by the District Clerk do not show that the trial court
has signed an order that is appealable at this time. See Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d
792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (holding that intermediate appellate courts lack
jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly
granted by law). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on March 3, 2020 Opinion Delivered March 4, 2020 Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Vincent Eugene Flick v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vincent-eugene-flick-v-state-texapp-2020.