Quincy Demond Blakely v. The State of Texas Appeal from County Criminal Court No. 5 of Denton County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02-18-00033-CR QUINCY DEMOND BLAKELY APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE ---------- FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 5 OF DENTON COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO. CR-2015-06355-E ---------- MEMORANDUM OPINION1 ---------Appellant Quincy Demond Blakely, who is proceeding pro se, attempts to appeal the trial court’s January 29, 2018 order denying his “Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter and Personal Jurisdiction.” On January 31, 2018, we notified Blakely of our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over his appeal because the trial court’s order did not appear to be an 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. appealable interlocutory order. We informed Blakely that unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal by February 12, 2018, we would dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 44.3. Blakely filed a response that did not address the order at issue, so on March 26, 2018, we extended the time—to April 5, 2018—for Blakely to respond to our jurisdiction letter. We received no response. Accordingly, because we do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f); Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). PER CURIAM PANEL: WALKER, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ. DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) DELIVERED: June 14, 2018 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.
