Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 13, 2006.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
NO. 14-06-00289-CR
____________
JESSICA APPLEGATE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 230th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1032069
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant entered a plea of guilty to credit card abuse. On September 12, 2005, the trial judge deferred adjudication of guilt, placed appellant on community supervision for four years, and ordered restitution. On February 27, 2006, the State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt. After a hearing, on March 2, 2006, the trial court dismissed the motion to adjudicate and signed an order amending appellant=s conditions of community supervision. Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal on March 13, 2006.
Generally, an appellate court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant where there has been a final judgment of conviction. Workman v. State, 170 Tex. Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.CFort Worth 1996, no pet.). The exceptions include: (1) appeals from an order deferring adjudication of guilt, Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 661 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); (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.CDallas 1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161.
To the extent appellant is attempting to appeal the order deferring adjudication of guilt signed September 12, 2005, her notice of appeal filed March 13, 2006, is untimely. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2. In addition, an direct appeal is not permitted from an order modifying the conditions of deferred adjudication community supervision. See Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977).
Because this appeal does not fall within the exceptions to the general rule that an appeal may be taken only from a final judgment of conviction, we have no jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.
PER CURIAM
Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed April 13, 2006.
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Guzman.
Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).