William Floyd v. State ( 2015 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
________________________
No. 07-15-00153-CR
________________________
WILLIAM FLOYD, APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
On Appeal from County Court at Law
Hays County, Texas1
Trial Court No. 14-0164CR; Honorable David Glickler, Presiding
April 16, 2015
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.
Appellant, William Floyd, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s written
order denying his motion to suppress. We dismiss this purported appeal for want of
jurisdiction.
1
Originally appealed to the Third Court of Appeals, this appeal was transferred to this Court by
the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001
(West 2005). We are unaware of any conflict between precedent of the Third Court of Appeals and that
of this Court on any relevant issue. TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3.
On March 6, 2015, Appellant filed Defendant’s Notice of Appeal purporting to
appeal the trial court’s “Order denying Defendant’s Motion to Suppress” signed
February 24, 2015. Pursuant to an inquiry by the Clerk of this Court, we know that
following entry of that order, further proceedings in the trial court ceased with no
judgment having been entered.
The State is entitled to pursue an interlocutory appeal from the granting of a
motion to suppress. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.01(a)(5) (West Supp. 2014).
However, there is no comparable statute or rule that allows a defendant to appeal an
interlocutory order denying a motion to suppress. See Dahlem v. State, 322 S.W.3d
685, 690-91 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2010, pet. ref’d) (holding that an order denying a
motion to suppress is not an “appealable order” for purposes of a defendant’s right of
appeal pursuant to article 44.02 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure);2 Jenkins v.
State, No. 03-13-00632-CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 13288 (Tex. App.—Austin Oct. 25,
2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (finding no right of appeal from
an interlocutory order denying a pretrial motion to suppress).
There being no final judgment of guilt or other appealable order, this appeal is
dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Per Curiam
Do not publish.
2
The State’s right to appeal from an interlocutory order granting a motion to suppress is
governed by a different statute and different rules. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 44.01(a)(5).
2