Richard Glen Williamson v. State

In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-08-308 CR ____________________ RICHARD GLEN WILLIAMSON, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 356th District Court Hardin County, Texas Trial Cause No. 18,584 MEMORANDUM OPINION On July 31, 2008, we notified the parties that our jurisdiction was not apparent from the notice of appeal, and notified them that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless we received a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal. The appellant did not file a response. The notice of appeal seeks to appeal the trial court's order denying a motion to set aside the indictment pursuant to a statute that applies to persons detained without indictment. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 32.01 (Vernon 2006). From the face of the notice of appeal it appears the indictment is still pending. We do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted to us by law. See Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (special plea of double jeopardy); Courson v. State, 996 S.W.2d 348 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1999, pet. dism'd) (Article 32.01 claims are reviewable on direct appeal after final judgment). Accordingly, we hold the order from which appellant appeals is not appealable at this time. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. APPEAL DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. ____________________________ STEVE McKEITHEN Chief Justice Opinion Delivered October 8, 2008 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Horton, JJ.