Summary
dismissing appeal of order granting State's motion to disqualify counsel for want of jurisdiction
Summary of this case from Fineberg v. StateOpinion
No. 05-07-01155-CR
Opinion Filed October 5, 2007. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex. R. App. P. 47
On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 366-81191-07.
Before Justices RICHTER, FRANCIS, and LANG-MIERS.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Francis M. Kearny filed a notice of appeal from the trial court's July 26, 2007 order granting the State's motion to disqualify counsel. We now have before us the State's September 14, 2007 motion to dismiss the appeal, which asserts the interlocutory orders are not appealable. Appellant did not respond to the motion. We agree with the State that the interlocutory order is not appealable. As a general rule, an appellate court may consider appeals by criminal defendants only after conviction. Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1998, no pet.). Intermediate appellate courts have no jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders absent express authority. Ex parte Apolinar, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex.Crim.App. 1991); Wright, 969 S.W.2d at 589. An order granting a motion to disqualify counsel is neither a judgment of conviction nor an otherwise appealable interlocutory order. See Wright, 969 S.W.2d at 589 (setting out types of appealable interlocutory orders). Absent a judgment of conviction or other appealable order, we have no jurisdiction over the appeal. We grant the State's motion to dismiss. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.