Opinion
NO. 02-16-00048-CR
04-07-2016
FINNIS DAVIS II APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
FROM THE 396TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY
TRIAL COURT NO. 1199412D MEMORANDUM OPINION
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
Appellant Finnis Davis II attempts to appeal from the trial court's order denying his motion for appointed counsel to file a postconviction motion for DNA testing. In its order, the trial court denied Appellant's motion for appointed counsel because it found that "there are no reasonable grounds for a Motion for DNA Testing under Chapter 64." We notified Appellant of our concern that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because an order denying the appointment of counsel to file a postconviction DNA motion is not immediately appealable. We stated that this appeal could be dismissed absent a response showing grounds for continuing it. Appellant's response does not provide grounds that would allow this interlocutory appeal. We therefore dismiss this appeal.
See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 64.01(c) (West Supp. 2015) (providing trial court shall appoint counsel for postconviction DNA proceeding if convicted person wishes to file DNA motion and is indigent and court "finds reasonable grounds for a motion to be filed").
SeeGutierrez v. State, 307 S.W.3d 318, 323 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010); McCuin v. State, No. 02-15-00459-CR, 2016 WL 673182, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Feb. 18, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); Gutierrez, 307 S.W.3d at 323; McCuin, 2016 WL 673182, at *1. --------
PER CURIAM PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ. DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: April 7, 2016