Micky Don Wade v. The State of Texas Appeal from 89th District Court of Wichita County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-20-00084-CR No. 02-20-00085-CR No. 02-20-00086-CR ___________________________ MICKY DON WADE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS On Appeal from the 89th District Court Wichita County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 59736-C, 59641-C, 59642-C*1 Before Sudderth, C.J.; Womack and Wallach, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Womack MEMORANDUM OPINION Micky Don Wade, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal in this court attempting to challenge the trial court’s “denying a Speedy Trial or not setting aside the indictments for not providing a Speedy Trial.” Generally, we have jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant only where there has been a final judgment of conviction. Bridle v. State, 16 S.W.3d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2000, no pet.) (per curiam); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.) (per curiam). Accordingly, we sent Wade a letter expressing our concern that we do not have jurisdiction because the trial court has not entered any appealable orders. We informed Wade that unless he or any other party desiring to continue the appeals filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeals, we would dismiss them. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.3. Although Wade filed a response, it does not show grounds for continuing these appeals. We therefore dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); see also Class v. State, No. 02-19-00464-CR, 2020 WL 579108, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Feb. 6, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (“Even if the trial court had denied Appellant’s speedy-trial motion in a written order, that order would be appealable only in an appeal from a final judgment.”). 2 /s/ Dana Womack Dana Womack Justice Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) Delivered: July 9, 2020 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.