Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 27, 2004.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

_______________

NOS. 14-03-00422-CR &

                                    14-03-00490-CR

_______________

BARRY ALTON CROOKS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

____________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 405th District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 02CR0981 & 02CR1089

____________________________________________________

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

In this consolidated appeal, appellant Barry Alton Crooks appeals two convictions for possession of cocaine.  He contends the trial court erred by granting the State=s motion to adjudicate guilt based upon evidence he alleges was illegally obtained and insufficient to support his convictions.  Because all dispositive issues are clearly settled in law, we issue this memorandum opinion.  See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.  We dismiss for want of jurisdiction.

Background

On July 23, 2002, appellant pled guilty to possession of cocaine in two cases and was placed on deferred adjudication community supervision for five years.  On September 15, 2002, appellant was arrested in another incident for possession of cocaine.  The State filed a motion to adjudicate guilt in both of the original cases, alleging, among other matters, that appellant violated the terms of his community supervision by committing the latter offense of possession of cocaine.  After the State rested at the hearing to adjudicate guilt, appellant moved for the latter possession of cocaine allegation to be dismissed, alleging the State had not proven appellant knew the substance in his possession was cocaine, and the evidence supporting the allegation had been illegally obtained.  The trial court overruled the motion.  The trial court later found the latter possession of cocaine allegation to be true, found all the other allegations to be not true, and convicted appellant of the original possession of cocaine charges.

Discussion

In two issues, appellant argues the evidence used against him at the hearing was illegally obtained, and the evidence was insufficient to prove appellant knowingly possessed a controlled substance.  However, it is well settled that no appeal may be taken from a trial court=s determination to proceed with an adjudication of guilt.  Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. Art. 42.12 ' 5(b) (Vernon Supp. 2004).  This includes claims that evidence admitted at the adjudication hearing was illegally obtained, Porter v. State, 93 S.W.3d 342, 344 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 2002, pet. ref=d) (citing Holder v. State, 618 S.W.2d 80, 81 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1981), as well as claims that the evidence supporting the trial court=s decision to adjudicate guilt was insufficient.  Williams v. State, 592 S.W.2d 931, 932 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1979).  Because appellant may not appeal the trial court=s decision to adjudicate his guilt, we have no jurisdiction to address his issues.  Accordingly, we dismiss for want of jurisdiction.     

/s/        Charles W. Seymore

Justice

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed April 27, 2004.

Panel consists of Justices Edelman, Frost, and Seymore.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).