Micky Don Wade v. State

In the
Court of Appeals
Second Appellate District of Texas
at Fort Worth
___________________________
No. 02-20-00125-CR
No. 02-20-00126-CR
No. 02-20-00127-CR
___________________________
MICKY DON WADE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 89th District Court
Wichita County, Texas
Trial Court Nos. 59,736-C; 59,641-C; 59,642-C*1-5
Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.
Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Micky Don Wade, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal in each of these
cases attempting to challenge the trial court’s September 1, 2020 interlocutory order,
in which the trial court “decline[d] to consider the merits of any of Defendant’s pro se
filings or to take any action with respect to them.” Generally, we have jurisdiction to
consider an appeal by a criminal defendant only where there has been a final judgment
of conviction. See Bridle v. State, 16 S.W.3d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2000,
no pet.) (per curiam); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth
1996, no pet.) (per curiam). Accordingly, we sent Wade a letter expressing our
concern that we do not have jurisdiction over these appeals because the trial court has
not entered any appealable orders. We informed Wade that unless he or any other
party desiring to continue the appeals filed a response showing grounds for
continuing the appeals, we would dismiss them. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3.
Although Wade filed a response, it does not show grounds for continuing these
appeals. We therefore dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App.
P. 43.2(f).
Per Curiam
Do Not Publish
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: October 1, 2020
2