eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 State Courts
 Court of Appeals of Texas
 2023-07

Bryan Stallworth v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )


Menu:
 
  •                                   IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-23-00211-CR
BRYAN STALLWORTH,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
From the 12th District Court
Walker County, Texas
Trial Court No. 30582
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Bryan Stallworth, acting pro se, attempts to appeal from the trial court’s
denial of his request to retain copies of certain discovery. We will dismiss this appeal for
want of jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction must be expressly given to the courts of appeals. Ragston v. State,
    424 S.W.3d 49
    , 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); In re Ford,
    553 S.W.3d 728
    , 731 (Tex. App.—Waco
2018, orig. proceeding). The standard for determining jurisdiction is not whether the
appeal is precluded by law, but whether the appeal is authorized by law. Abbott v. State,
    271 S.W.3d 694
    , 696–97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Ford, 553 S.W.3d at 731.
Article 44.02 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides: “A defendant in any
criminal action has the right of appeal under the rules hereinafter prescribed.” TEX. CODE
CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02. This statutory right of appeal has been interpreted as
allowing appeal only from a final judgment. See State v. Sellers,
    790 S.W.2d 316
    , 321 n.4
(Tex. Crim. App. 1990). The courts of appeals therefore do not have jurisdiction to review
interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been otherwise expressly granted by law.
Apolinar v. State,
    820 S.W.2d 792
    , 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991).
We have not found any rule or any statutory or constitutional provision that
would authorize Stallworth’s appeal from the trial court’s interlocutory order denying
his request to retain copies of certain discovery. Accordingly, the trial court’s order is not
appealable, and we have no jurisdiction to entertain Stallworth’s appeal from the order.
See
    id.
     Thus, for the reasons stated, this appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Stallworth’s “Motion to Expedite Stay of Trial” is dismissed as moot.
MATT JOHNSON
Justice
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Johnson, and
Justice Smith
Dismissed
Opinion delivered and filed July 12, 2023
Do not publish
[CR25]
Stallworth v. State                                                                     Page 2