William Harris v. State
This text of William Harris v. State (William Harris 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
Opinion issued March 14, 2019
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-18-00960-CR ——————————— WILLIAM HARRIS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 232nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 876384
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an attempted appeal of the denial of a motion for the appointment of
habeas corpus counsel. A ruling denying a motion to appoint counsel is an
interlocutory order. See, e.g., Gutierrez v. State, 307 S.W.3d 318, 323 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2010) (“an order denying appointed counsel under Article 64.01(c) is not an immediately appealable order”). We do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory
orders unless jurisdiction has been expressly granted by statute. Apolinar v. State,
820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); see also Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d
694, 696-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (“The standard for determining jurisdiction is
not whether the appeal is precluded by law, but whether the appeal is authorized by
law.”). There is no statutory authorization to appeal the denial of a motion to appoint
habeas corpus counsel.
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. TEX. R. APP. P.
42.3(a), 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Goodman and Countiss.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
William Harris v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-harris-v-state-texapp-2019.