Narrative Opinion Summary
Alonzo Dee Freeman filed an appeal regarding the trial court's denial of his Post-Conviction Motion of Discovery under Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. The Tenth Court of Appeals indicated that the appeal was subject to dismissal due to a lack of appellate jurisdiction in criminal matters unless specifically allowed by law, noting no constitutional or statutory provisions permitted such an appeal. The court referenced precedents from previous cases (Kelly v. State and Everett v. State) to support this position. The Clerk of the Court notified the parties that a response demonstrating grounds for the appeal's continuation was required within ten days; however, no response was submitted. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal. The opinion was delivered on June 2, 2010, and is designated as not for publication.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Jurisdiction in Criminal Matterssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Tenth Court of Appeals determined that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal concerning the denial of a Post-Conviction Motion of Discovery under Article 11.07, as no constitutional or statutory provisions permitted such an appeal.
Reasoning: The Tenth Court of Appeals indicated that the appeal was subject to dismissal due to a lack of appellate jurisdiction in criminal matters unless specifically allowed by law, noting no constitutional or statutory provisions permitted such an appeal.
Precedential Support for Lack of Jurisdictionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court cited precedents from prior cases, specifically Kelly v. State and Everett v. State, to substantiate its lack of jurisdiction over the appeal.
Reasoning: The court referenced precedents from previous cases (Kelly v. State and Everett v. State) to support this position.
Requirement for Demonstrating Grounds for Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court required the appellant to demonstrate grounds for the appeal's continuation within ten days, and upon failure to do so, the appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Clerk of the Court notified the parties that a response demonstrating grounds for the appeal's continuation was required within ten days; however, no response was submitted.