William Foster v. State

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09-04-484 CR ____________________

WILLIAM FOSTER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 91660

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION ⁽¹⁾  

On December 2, 2004, we informed the parties that our jurisdiction was not apparent from the notice of appeal, and notified them that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless we received a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. The appellant did not file a response.

The notice of appeal seeks to appeal "for dismissal in violation of the Texas Speedy Trial Act." The district clerk informed the Court that no denial order had been entered. ⁽²⁾

Accordingly, we hold the appellant failed to invoke our appellate jurisdiction because no appealable order has been signed by the trial court. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.

PER CURIAM

Opinion Delivered January 19, 2005

Do Not Publish

Before Gaultney, Kreger and Horton, JJ.

1. Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

2. We express no opinion on the appealability of an interlocutory order denying a motion for speedy trial. See Ex parte Weise, 55 S.W.3d 617, 619-20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001); Ex parte Delbert, 582 S.W.2d 145, 146 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979). Presumably, the appellant is not referring to former Article 32A.02, Code of Criminal Procedure. See Meshell v. State, 739 S.W.2d 246 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987).