Opinion
03-22-00351-CR
07-27-2022
Anthony Tatum, Appellant v. State of Texas, Appellee
DO NOT PUBLISH
FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY NOS. 20-03011, 20-02719 & 20-02721, THE HONORABLE BEN NOLAN, JUDGE PRESIDING
Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Chari L. Kelly, Justice
Anthony Tatum, appearing pro se, has filed a notice of appeal, seeking a dismissal of the pending "charges made against [his] legal person/corporation . . . for lack of jurisdiction."
The standard for determining whether a Texas appellate court has jurisdiction in a criminal case "is not whether the appeal is precluded by law, but whether the appeal is authorized by law." Blanton v. State, 369 S.W.3d 894, 902 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (quoting Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008)); Tex. Const. art. V, § 6(a) (providing that courts of appeal have appellate jurisdiction "under such restrictions and regulations as may be prescribed by law"). Because this standard extends to interlocutory appeals, "courts of appeals do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law." Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Upon review of the record, we conclude that there are no signed interlocutory orders from which Tatum may appeal.
For this reason, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); see, e.g., Staley v. State, 233 S.W.3d 337, 338 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (dismissing appeal because it was not authorized by law).
Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction