Shannon Mark Douthit v. the State of Texas

COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
————————————
No. 08-26-00067-CR
————————————

Shannon Mark Douthit, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee

On Appeal from the 394th District Court
Presidio County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2076

M E MO RA N D UM O PI NI O N
Self-represented Appellant Shannon Mark Douthit filed a Notice of Appeal stating that he

seeks to appeal the trial court’s order denying his motion for new trial based on newly discovered

evidence.

This Court notified Appellant that the Notice of Appeal appears to have been taken from a

non-appealable order or final judgment and that the Court may lack jurisdiction. See Tex. Code

Crim. Proc. Ann art. 44.02. The Court further notified the Appellant that the appeal would be

dismissed for want of jurisdiction unless he filed a response demonstrating that the Court has
jurisdiction over the appeal. However, Appellant’s response does not demonstrate that the order

denying his motion for new trial is an appealable order or otherwise establish this Court’s

jurisdiction over the appeal.

Because the order denying Appellant’s motion for new trial is not an appealable order and

Appellant has not shown that this Court has jurisdiction, the appeal is dismissed for want of

jurisdiction. See Billiot v. State, No. 02-11-00298-CR, 2011 WL 4469232, at *1 (Tex. App.—

Fort Worth Aug. 30, 2011, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (remarking that

no “Texas statute authorizes a direct appeal from the denial of a motion for new trial independently

of the direct appeal from an underlying conviction.”) (citing Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann.

art. 44.02)); see also Nguyen v. State, No. 14-11-00545-CR, 2011 WL 2650737, at *1 (Tex. App.—

Houston [14th Dist.] July 7, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (appealing

from a denial of motion for new trial, separate and apart from appeal from conviction, is improper);

Abbott v. State, 271 S.W.3d 694, 696–97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) (determining jurisdiction is based

on whether the appeal is authorized by law). All pending motions are denied as moot.

MARIA SALAS MENDOZA, Chief Justice

March 16, 2026

Before Salas Mendoza, C.J., Palafox, and Soto, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)

2