Quaylin Running James Harmon v. the State of Texas ( 2022 )

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-22-00517-CR
Quaylin Running James Harmon, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE 368TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY
NO. 21-0999-K368, HONORABLE BURT CARNES, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Quaylin Running James Harmon, who has not been finally sentenced,
seeks to appeal the trial court’s order denying his pretrial motion to suppress evidence. In
Texas, courts of appeals do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders in criminal cases
unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52
(Tex. Crim. App. 2014). No such grant exists for a defendant’s direct appeal of an interlocutory
order denying a pretrial motion to suppress. See Dahlem v. State, 322 S.W.3d 685, 690-91
(Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2010, pet. ref’d) (noting that pretrial order on motion to suppress is
interlocutory and not appealable by defendant); see also Foeller v. State, No. 03-16-00616-CR,
2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 538, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 24, 2017, no pet. ) (mem. op., not
designated for publication) (dismissing for want of jurisdiction defendant’s appeal of denial of
motion to suppress). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R.
App. P. 43.2(f).
__________________________________________
Chari L. Kelly, Justice
Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly
Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction
Filed: October 28, 2022
Do Not Publish
2