Nina Marie Dukes v. The State of Texas Appeal from 117th District Court of Nueces County (memorandum opinion)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-20-00051-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ NINA MARIE DUKES, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa Memorandum Opinion by Justice Longoria Appellant, Nina Marie Dukes, attempted to appeal an order modifying conditions of probation issued by the trial court on October 24, 2019. On January 27, 2020, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant the order from which the appeal was taken did not appear to be an appealable order. The letter requested correction of this defect within ten days or the appeal would be dismissed. To date, no corrective action has been taken by appellant. The courts of appeals do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders in a criminal appeal absent express statutory authority. Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Bridle v. State, 16 S.W.3d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2000, no pet.). Exceptions to the general rule include: (1) certain appeals while on deferred adjudication community supervision, Kirk v. State, 942 S.W.2d 624, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); (2) appeals from the denial of a motion to reduce bond, TEX. R. APP. P. 31.1; McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161; and (3) certain appeals from the denial of habeas corpus relief, Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. See also Bridle, 16 S.W.3d at 908 n.1. The Court, having examined and fully considered the notice of appeal and the matters before the Court, is of the opinion there is not an appealable order and this Court lacks jurisdiction over the matters here. Because there is no appealable order, we DISMISS the appeal for want of jurisdiction. All pending motions, if any, are likewise DISMISSED. NORA L. LONGORIA Justice Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Delivered and filed the 19th day of March, 2020. 2