Opinion
02-24-00341-CR
12-05-2024
Rachel Nicole Spelman, Appellant v. The State of Texas
Do Not Publish Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b)
On Appeal from the 432nd District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1665014
Before Womack, Wallach, and Walker, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Dana Womack Justice
Appellant Rachel Nicole Spelman filed a notice of appeal expressing her intent to appeal the trial court's "Orders, Rulings and/or Judgements [sic] of August 26th - 29th, as well as any other rulings subsumed therein." Based on our review of Spelman's notice of appeal and other documents received from the trial court, it did not appear to us that Spelman was appealing from a judgment of conviction.
Indeed, in the trial court's certification of Spelman's right of appeal that was attached to her notice of appeal, the trial court stated, "The defendant has NO right of appeal. -- Case is pending."
Accordingly, on September 20, 2024, we notified Spelman of our concern that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. We explained that in criminal cases, our jurisdiction is generally limited to appeals from judgments of conviction. See McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth 1996, no pet.) (per curiam). We warned Spelman that unless she or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response by September 30, 2024, showing grounds for continuing the appeal, we could dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App.P. 43.2(f), 44.3.
We later received notice that on October 4, 2024, the trial court had signed an order disqualifying Spelman's counsel. Subsequently, we received notice that Spelman had retained new counsel to represent her. Accordingly, on October 23, 2024, we sent Spelman a second letter-addressed to her newly-retained counsel-regarding our concern that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. We again explained that our jurisdiction is generally limited to appeals from judgments of conviction. See McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. We warned Spelman that unless she or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response by November 4, 2024, showing grounds for continuing the appeal, we could dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App.P. 43.2(f), 44.3.
Spelman has not filed a response to either of our letters expressing our jurisdictional concern. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex.R.App.P. 43.2(f); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161.