Hasseh El Bey v. The State of Texas Appeal from 222nd District Court of Oldham County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo No. 07-21-00066-CR No. 07-21-00067-CR No. 07-21-00068-CR HASSEH EL BEY, APPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 222nd District Court Oldham County, Texas Trial Court Nos. OCR-20F-043, OCI-20I-023, OCR-20I-086, Honorable Roland D. Saul, Presiding May 17, 2021 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before PIRTLE and PARKER and DOSS, JJ. Appellant, Hasseh El Bey, proceeding pro se, filed notices of appeal from the “information, complaint, judgment, and capias” purportedly issued by the trial court in these criminal proceedings. We dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction. The trial court clerk has certified that no judgment of conviction or sentence has been entered in these causes. Because our appellate jurisdiction in criminal matters is limited to judgments of conviction or where jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law, we notified Appellant that the appeals were subject to dismissal unless he could show grounds for continuing them. See Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696-97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Appellant filed a response asserting that he seeks to appeal the pretrial errors of the trial court, including a judgment nisi and capias issued for his failure to appear in court and an order denying his motion to dismiss his criminal charges. However, such pretrial rulings are not judgments of conviction and we have found no authority granting this Court jurisdiction to review them. See Neal v. State, No. 07-18-00273-CV, 2018 Tex. App. LEXIS 6366, at *3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Aug. 14, 2018, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal from judgment nisi because the judgment is an interlocutory order, not appealable until final judgment); Ahmad v. State, 158 S.W.3d 525, 527 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004, pet. ref’d) (concluding that an appeal from the denial of a motion to quash an indictment is not a permissible interlocutory appeal). For these reasons, we dismiss Appellant’s appeals for want of jurisdiction. Per Curiam Do not publish. 2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.
