Alfonso Atkinson v. the State of Texas

NUMBER 13-26-00179-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
____________________________________________________

ALFONSO ATKINSON, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

ON APPEAL FROM THE 156TH DISTRICT COURT
OF LIVE OAK COUNTY, TEXAS
____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Silva, Peña, and Fonseca
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Peña

This cause is before the Court on its own motion. On February 20, 2026, appellant

filed a “Notice of Restricted Appeal” attempting to appeal “interlocutory rulings” and

“denial of habeas application.” On March 19, 2026, the Clerk of the Court notified

appellant it appears there is no final, appealable order from which appellant may appeal.

On April 21, 2026, appellant filed a response which does not cure the defects nor identify

an appealable order.
A state appellate court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal

defendant where there has been a signed final judgment of conviction. Workman v. State,

343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161

(Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). Exceptions to the general rule include: (1) certain

appeals while on deferred adjudication community supervision, Kirk v. State, 942 S.W.2d

624, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); (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.—Dallas

1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. There are no appealable orders currently

before the Court; therefore, we lack jurisdiction over the matters.

Our review of the documents before the Court does not reveal an appealable order

entered by the trial court within thirty days before the filing of appellant’s notices of

appeal. The Court, having examined and fully considered the notices of appeal, is of the

opinion that there are not any appealable orders, and this Court lacks jurisdiction over the

matters herein. Accordingly, these appeals are hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction,

and appellant’s motion for appointment of counsel is also dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

L. ARON PEÑA JR.
Justice
Do not publish.
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed on the
11th day of June, 2026.

2