Quaylin Running James Harmon v. The State of Texas Appeal from 368th District Court of Williamson County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-22-00517-CR Quaylin Running James Harmon, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE 368TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY NO. 21-0999-K368, HONORABLE BURT CARNES, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Quaylin Running James Harmon, who has not been finally sentenced, seeks to appeal the trial court’s order denying his pretrial motion to suppress evidence. In Texas, courts of appeals do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders in criminal cases unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law. Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). No such grant exists for a defendant’s direct appeal of an interlocutory order denying a pretrial motion to suppress. See Dahlem v. State, 322 S.W.3d 685, 690-91 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2010, pet. ref’d) (noting that pretrial order on motion to suppress is interlocutory and not appealable by defendant); see also Foeller v. State, No. 03-16-00616-CR, 2017 Tex. App. LEXIS 538, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 24, 2017, no pet. ) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (dismissing for want of jurisdiction defendant’s appeal of denial of motion to suppress). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). __________________________________________ Chari L. Kelly, Justice Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction Filed: October 28, 2022 Do Not Publish 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
