NUMBER 13-24-00522-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI — EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ MICHAEL EUGENE MORGAN, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________ ON APPEAL FROM THE 19TH DISTRICT COURT OF MCLENNAN COUNTY, TEXAS ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices West and Fonseca Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Tijerina This matter is before us on appellant, Michael Eugene Morgan’s motion to receive a free clerk’s record. Appellant is attempting to appeal a denial of a post-conviction discovery motion issued by the trial court on August 26, 2024.1 On October 28, 2024, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that it appears the order he was attempting to appeal

1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Tenth Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001. is not appealable; appellant was further notified that if the defect was not cured within thirty days from the date of the notice the appeal may be dismissed.

Generally, 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 is no appealable order currently before the Court; therefore, we lack jurisdiction over the matter.

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 notice of appeal. The Court, having examined and fully considered the notice of appeal, is of the opinion that there is not an appealable order, and this Court lacks jurisdiction over the matters herein. Accordingly, appellant’s motion for a free record and this appeal are both hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

JAIME TIJERINA Chief Justice Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on the 30th day of January, 2025.