Evan Albert McGinley v. The State of Texas Appeal from 282nd Judicial District Court of Dallas County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Dismissed; Opinion Filed April 17, 2018. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-18-00381-CR EVAN ALBERT MCGINLEY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 282nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17-60637-S MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Stoddart Opinion by Justice Myers On April 4, 2018, Evan Albert McGinley filed a partially completed notice of appeal in the above case. Filed along with the notice of appeal were other partially completed documents: a motion requesting back time, a motion to quash the enhancement count, and a motion in limine. The Court contacted the trial court to determine the date of appellant’s conviction or other appealable order. The trial court informed us that although appellant has been indicted, he has not yet been convicted and no appealable orders have been signed. An appeal must be perfected either from a trial court’s judgment or an appealable order. . See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Where there is no sentence to be appealed or no appealable order, an appellate court has no jurisdiction. See Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 90 (Tex. App.— 1998). Because there is no sentence or appealable order in this case, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. /Lana Myers/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 180381F.U05 –2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT EVAN ALBERT MCGINLEY, Appellant No. 05-18-00381-CR On Appeal from the 282nd Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F17-60637-S. Opinion delivered by Justice Myers, Justices Lang and Stoddart participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction. Judgment entered this 17th day of April, 2018. –3–

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.