Mahsa Parviz-Khyavi v. The State of Texas Appeal from 219th Judicial District Court of Collin County (memorandum opinion)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Dismissed and Opinion Filed October 9, 2020 In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00870-CR No. 05-20-00871-CR No. 05-20-00872-CR No. 05-20-00873-CR MAHSA PARVIZ-KHYAVI, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 219-83499-2017, 2019-81286-2018, 219-81679-2018 & 2019-82552-2019 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Carlyle, and Browning Opinion by Justice Molberg On September 22, 2020, Mahsa Parviz-Khyavi filed notices of appeal in each of the above cases. Each notice states he is appealing “an order from 09/02/2020, later erroneously issued on 09/10/2020,” denying his motion to recuse Judge Edgeworth. We dismiss these appeals. A defendant’s right to appeal in a criminal case is a statutorily created right. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02; Bayless v. State, 91 S.W.3d 801, 805 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002). Courts of appeals lack 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); Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1998, no pet.). The procedures for recusal of judges are set out in the rules of civil procedure and apply to criminal cases. TEX. R. CIV. P. 18a; De Leon v. Aguilar, 127 S.W.3d 1, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (orig. proceeding); Arnold v. State, 853 S.W.2d 543, 544 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). An order denying a motion to recuse is reviewable only on appeal from a final judgment. TEX. R. CIV. P. 18a(j)(1)(A). Absent a timely appeal of a final conviction, an appellate court lacks jurisdiction over a trial court’s standalone order denying a motion to recuse. Green v. State, 374 S.W.3d 434, 445 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012). Appellant filed motions to recuse Judge Edgeworth in each of the above cases, which the assigned judge denied. However, appellant has not been convicted of any crime. Because there are no final convictions, we lack jurisdiction over these appeals. We dismiss these appeals. 200870f.u05 Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE –2– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MAHSA PARVIZ-KHYAVI, Appellant No. 05-20-00870-CR On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-834992017. Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg. Justices Carlyle and Browning participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal. Judgment entered this 9th day of October, 2020. –3– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MAHSA PARVIZ-KHYAVI, Appellant No. 05-20-00871-CR On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-812862018. Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg. Justices Carlyle and Browning participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal. Judgment entered this 9th day of October, 2020. –4– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MAHSA PARVIZ-KHYAVI, Appellant No. 05-20-00872-CR On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-816792018. Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg. Justices Carlyle and Browning participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal. Judgment entered this 9th day of October, 2020. –5– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT MAHSA PARVIZ-KHYAVI, Appellant No. 05-20-00873-CR On Appeal from the 219th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 219-825522019. Opinion delivered by Justice Molberg. Justices Carlyle and Browning participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal. Judgment entered this 9th day of October, 2020. –6–

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.