Tracy Murrow v. State

Tracy Murrow v. State






IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS


No. 10-02-144-CR


     TRACY MURROW,

                                                                              Appellant

     v.


     THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                                                                              Appellee


From the 249th District Court

Johnson County, Texas

Trial Court # F33476

                                                                                                                

MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                                                                                                

      Tracy Murrow pleaded guilty to possessing less than one gram of amphetamine. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the court sentenced him to two years’ confinement in a state jail and a $750 fine, suspended imposition of sentence, and placed him on community supervision for five years. The State filed a revocation motion about four months later. After a hearing, the court amended the conditions of Murrow’s community supervision, primarily by requiring him to serve a period of confinement in a state jail of no less than 120 days and no more than 180 days. Murrow appealed.

      Article V, section 6 of the Texas Constitution invests this Court with jurisdiction over “all cases of which the District Courts or County Courts have original or appellate jurisdiction, under such restrictions and regulations as may be prescribed by law.” Tex. Const. art. V, § 6. Article 44.02 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides in pertinent part, “A defendant in any criminal action has the right of appeal.” Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.02 (Vernon 1979). Texas courts have consistently construed article 44.02 to allow an appeal only “from a ‘final judgment [of conviction],’ though the statute does not contain this limitation on its face.” Benford v. State, 994 S.W.2d 404, 408-09 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.) (quoting State v. Sellers, 790 S.W.2d 316, 321 n.4 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990)).

      This Court has jurisdiction over other types of criminal appeals only when “expressly granted by law.” Benford, 994 S.W.2d at 409 (quoting Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)). No statute vests this Court with jurisdiction over an appeal from an order modifying the conditions of community supervision. See Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977); Christopher v. State, 7 S.W.3d 224, 225 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, pet. ref’d); Perez v. State, 938 S.W.2d 761, 762-63 (Tex. App.—Austin 1997, pet. ref’d). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

 

                                                                   PER CURIAM


Before Chief Justice Davis,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice Gray

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Opinion delivered and filed August 28, 2002

Do not publish

[CR25]