## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TE XAS

N O

. P D

- 0 2 8 0

- 1 5

T H E S T A T E O F T E X A S

v

.

J O H N A L L E N W A C H T E N D O R F

, J R

. , A p p e l l e e

O N S T A T E ’ S P E T I T I O N F O R D I S C R E T I O N A R Y R E V I E W

F R O M T H E T H I R D C O U R T O F A P P E A L S

W I L L I A M S O N C O U N T Y

Y E A R Y

, J

. , a n n o u n c e d t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e C o u r t i n a n o p i n i o n i n w h i c h M E Y E R S

,

J O H N S O N

, a n d R IC H A R D S O N

, J J

. , j o i n e d

. N E W E L L

, J

. , f i l e d a c o n c u r r i n g o p i n i o n

.

K E L L E R

, P

. J

. , f

i l e d a d i s s e n t i n g o p i n i o n i n w h i c h K E A S L E R

, H E R V E Y

, a n d A L C A L A

, J J

. , j o i n e d

.

O P I N I O N

T h e i s s u e i n t h i s c a s e i s w h e t h e r t h e t i m e f o r f i l i n g a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l f r o m a n o r d e r

a d v e r s e t o t h e S t a t e s h o u l d b e g i n t o r u n w i t h t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s s i g n i n g o f t h a t o r d e r i f t h e S t a t e

r e c e i v e d n o t i m e l y n o t i c e t h a t t h e o r d e r h a d b e e n s i g n e d

. T h e S t a t e a s s e r t s t h a t i t w a s n o t

n o t i f i e d t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t h a d s i g n e d a n o r d e r g r a n t i n g A p p e l l e e ’ s m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s u n t i lWACHTENDORF — 2

t h e p e r i o d f

o r f i l i n g i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l h a d e x p i r e d

. H a v i n g r e c e i v e d n o n o t i c e o f t h i s

t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t

, t h e S t a t e f i l e d a n u n t i m e l y n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

, a n d t h e T h i r d C o u r t o f A p p e a l s

d i s m i s s e d i t s a p p e a l f

o r w a n t o f j u r i s d i c t i o n

, i n a n u n p u b l i s h e d m e m o r a n d u m o p i n i o n

. S t a t e

v

. W a c h t e n d o r

f

, N o

. 0 3

- 1 4

- 0 0 6 3 3

- C R

, 2 0 1 5 W L 8 9 4 7 3 1 ( T e x

. A p p

. — A u s t i n F e b

. 2 6

, 2 0 1 5 )

( n o t d e s i g n a t e d f

o r p u b l i c a t i o n )

. W e g r a n t e d t h e S t a t e ’ s p e t i t i o n f o r d i s c r e t i o n a r y r e v i e w i n

t h i s c a s e i n o r d e r t o a d d r e s s i t s a r g u m e n t t h a t t h e t i m e t a b l e f o r i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l s h o u l d n o t

b e t r i g g e r e d b y a n e v e n t f o r w h i c h i t o b t a i n e d n o n o t i c e a n d h a d n o a c t u a l k n o w l e d g e

. W e

s h a l l a f f i r m t h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e c o u r t o f a p p e a l s

.

B A C K G R O U N D

A p p e l l e e w a s c h a r g e d w i t h t h e f e l o n y o f f e n s e o f D r i v i n g W h i l e I n t o x i c a t e d

.

A c c o r d i n g t o t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k ’ s f i l e

- m a r k

, o n J a n u a r y 1 6

, 2 0 1 4

, A p p e l l e e f i l e d a m o t i o n t o

s u p p r e s s t h e r e s u l t s o f a t e s t f o r b l o o d a l c o h o l c o n c e n t r a t i o n f o l l o w i n g t h e e x t r a c t i o n o f

b l o o d a t t h e t i m e o f h i s a r r e s t

. A t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f a h e a r i n g c o n d u c t e d o n F e b r u a r y 1 4

, 1

2 0 1 4

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o o k t h e m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s u n d e r a d v i s e m e n t

. O n J u l y 7

, 2 0 1 4

, t h e

h e a r i n g r e c o n v e n e d

, a n d t h e t r i a l c o u r t o r a l l y a n n o u n c e d t h a t i t i n t e n d e d t o g r a n t A p p e l l e e ’ s

m o t i o n

. T h e d o c k e t s h e e t r e f l e c t s t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t a c t u a l l y s i g n e d a n o r d e r t o t h a t e f f e c t o n

t h e s a m e d a y

. T h e S t a t e m a i n t a i n s

, h o w e v e r

, t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t d i d n o t s i g n t h e o r d e r i n o p e n

c o u r t

, a n d t h e R e p o r t e r ’ s R e c o r d d o e s n o t c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e t h a t i t d i d

. R a t h e r

, t h e R e p o r t e r ’ s

Appellee ’s motion to suppress included a proposed order for the trial court to sign. The trial 1

court did not sign this orig inally proff ere d version of the order

, which appea rs on pag e 2 9 o f the

Clerk’s Rec ord.WACHTENDORF — 3

R e c o r d s h o w s t h a t

, i n r e s p o n s e t o t h e S t a t e ’ s r e q u e s t f o r w r i t t e n f

i n d i n g s o f f

a c t a n d

c o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t d i r e c t e d A p p e l l e e t o p r e p a r e p r o p o s e d f i n d i n g s a n d 2

c o n c l u s i o n s a n d a d

j o u r n e d t h e h e a r i n g

. A p p e l l e e d i d n o t i m m e d i a t e l y f i l e t h e r e q u e s t e d

f i n d i n g s a n d c o n c l u s i o n s

.

A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d ) o f t h e T e x a s C o d e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e c u r r e n t l y r e q u i r e s t h e S t a t e

t o f i l e n o t i c e o f a p p e a l w i t h i n t w e n t y d a y s a f t e r a n a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r “ i s e n t e r e d b y t h e c o u r t

. ”

T E X

. C O D E C R IM

. P R O C

. a r t

. 4 4

. 0 1 ( d )

. T h i s C o u r t h a s h e l d t h a t t h e t r i g g e r i n g e v e n t t o b e g i n

t h e r u n n i n g o f t h e p e r i o d w i t h i n w h i c h t h e S t a t e m u s t f i l e i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i s w h e n t h e t r i a l

j u d g e s i g n s t h e o r d e r

. S t a t e v

. R o s e n b a u m

, 8 1 8 S

. W

. 2 d 3 9 8

, 4 0 2 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. 1 9 9 1 ) ;

S t a t e e x r e l

. S u t t o n v

. B a g e

, 8 2 2 S

. W

. 2 d 5 5

, 5 7 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. 1 9 9 2 )

. R a t h e r t h a n f i l e a

n o t i c e o f a p p e a l w i t h i n t w e n t y d a y s o f t h e d a t e t h e t r i a l c o u r t s i g n e d t h e o r d e r g r a n t i n g t h e

m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s i n t h i s c a s e

, h o w e v e r

, t h e S t a t e w a i t e d u n t i l A u g u s t 1 9

, 2 0 1 4

, w e l l o v e r

t w e n t y d a y s a f

t e r t h e d a t e t h e o r d e r w a s s i g n e d

. A t t h a t t i m e t h e S t a t e f i l e d

, n o t a n o t i c e o f

a p p e a l

, b u t a m o t i o n a s k i n g t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o r e c o n s i d e r i t s r u l i n g o n A p p e l l e e ’ s m o t i o n t o

s u p p r e s s

. 3

T h e t r i a l c o u r t e n t e r t a i n e d t h e S t a t e ’ s m o t i o n t o r e c o n s i d e r o n S e p t e m b e r 2 5

, 2 0 1 4

,

See State v . Cullen

, 195 S.W .3d 696 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (a t the reque st of the losing 2

party in a motion to suppress, the trial court is requ i re d t o en t er express finding s of fac t and

conclusions of law ).

See B lack v . State

, 362 S.W .3d 626, 635 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (a ruling on a motion to 3

suppress is inter locutory

, and the trial court may rec onsider its ruling at any time be fore the end of

trial).WACHTENDORF — 4

a n d h e a r d a d d i t i o n a l e v i d e n c e

. A t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h i s h e a r i n g

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t a n n o u n c e d

t h a t i t w a s “ i n c l i n e d t o j u s t c o n t i n u e w i t h [ i t s ] r u l i n g [

. ] ” T h e t r i a l c o u r t t h e n r e m i n d e d

A p p e l l e e t h a t i t h a d r e q u e s t e d h i m t o p r e p a r e p r o p o s e d f i n d i n g s o f f

a c t a n d c o n c l u s i o n s o f

l a w

. A p p e l l e e r e s p o n d e d t h a t p r o p o s e d f i n d i n g s a n d c o n c l u s i o n s w e r e n o l o n g e r n e e d e d

b e c a u s e t h e S t a t e h a d “ w a i v e d ” i t s r i g h t o f a p p e a l b y f a i l i n g t o t i m e l y f

i l e i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

.

T h e t r i a l j u d g e d e n i e d a n y m e m o r y o f h a v i n g s i g n e d t h e o r d e r g r a n t i n g t h e m o t i o n t o

s u p p r e s s

, b u t a l m o s t i m m e d i a t e l y t h e r e a f t e r h e r e

- d i s c o v e r e d t h e s i g n e d o r d e r

— a p p a r e n t l y

i n t h e c l e r k ’ s f

i l e

. T h e t r i a l j u d g e n o t e d

, h o w e v e r

, t h a t t h e s i g n e d o r d e r w a s “ n o t f i l e

m a r k e d

. ” T h e p r o s e c u t o r r e p l i e d t h a t “ i t ’ s s t i l l n o t e n t e r e d o f r e c o r d i f i t ’ s n o t f i l e

- s t a m p e d

. ” 4

T h e t r i a l c o u r t a s k e d t h e p a r t i e s t o s u p p l y c a s e l a w r e g a r d i n g t h e S t a t e ’ s a b i l i t y t o a p p e a l

u n d e r t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s

, a n d A p p e l l e e d i r e c t e d t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s a t t e n t i o n t o S t a t e v

. C o w s e r t

,

2 0 7 S

. W

. 3 d 3 4 7

, 3 5 1

- 5 2 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. 2 0 0 6 )

, a c a s e i n w h i c h t h i s C o u r t h e l d t h a t a r u l i n g

The e ntire colloquy

rea ds: 4

THE COURT: Well, I don’t see a n order signe d, either, so unless y ou’ve

g ot a copy

of it -- a nd, ag ain, I ’m kind of –

[P ROSECUTOR] : And I would object to any thing that’ s not the orig inal

in the Court’s file.

THE COURT: Okay . I lied. There it is. I t’s not file-mar ked.

[P ROSECUTOR] : Then it’s not -- then it’s not ente red of rec ord.

THE COURT: Well, thi s is on the Motion t o Suppress Blood Spec imen

hear d on Fe bruar

y 14th and sig ned Jul y

7th, 2014.

[P ROSECUTOR] : Then it’s still not enter ed of r ecor d if it’s not filestamped.WACHTENDORF — 5

o n a m o t i o n t o r e c o n s i d e r t h e g r a n t i n g o f a m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s i s n o t i t s e l f a n a p p e a l a b l e

o r d e r u n d e r A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( a ) ( 5 ) o f t h e T e x a s C o d e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e

. S e e T E X

. C O D E

C R IM

. P R O C

. a r t

. 4 4

. 0 1 ( a ) ( 5 ) ( p e r m i t t i n g t h e S t a t e t o a p p e a l a n o r d e r t h a t g r a n t s a m o t i o n t o

s u p p r e s s )

. T h e t r i a l c o u r t r e s e t t h e c a s e f o r a f u t u r e “ s t a t u s h e a r i n g ” a n d a d j o u r n e d w i t h o u t

r u l i n g o n t h e S t a t e ’ s m o t i o n t o r e c o n s i d e r

. A t s o m e p o i n t

— t h e r e c o r d d o e s n o t c l e a r l y

i n d i c a t e h o w o r o n w h o s e i m p e t u s

— t h e s i g n e d o r d e r g r a n t i n g t h e m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s w a s

s t a m p e d a s “ F I L E D ” i n t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k ’ s o f f i c e w i t h a f

i l i n g d a t e o f

S e p t e m b e r 2 5

, 2 0 1 4

. 5

T h e S t a t e e v e n t u a l l y f

i l e d i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l o n S e p t e m b e r 3 0

, 2 0 1 4

, f i v e d a y s a f

t e r

t h e d a t e o n w h i c h t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s o r d e r g r a n t i n g t h e m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s w a s u l t i m a t e l y f i l e

m a r k e d

. O n N o v e m b e r 6

, 2 0 1 4

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t c o n d u c t e d t h e p r o m i s e d s t a t u s h e a r i n g

. I n t h e

i n t e r i m

, A p p e l l e e h a d f

i l e d a m o t i o n i n t h e c o u r t o f a p p e a l s t o d i s m i s s t h e S t a t e ’ s p u r p o r t e d

a p p e a l f o r l a c k o f j u r i s d i c t i o n

. T h e S t a t e c o m p l a i n e d t h a t i t h a d n o t b e e n p r i v y t o t h e t r i a l

c o u r t ’ s J u l y 7 t h s i g n i n g o f t h e o r d e r g r a n t i n g t h e m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s

. B e c a u s e t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s

o r a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o n J u l y 7 t h t h a t i t i n t e n d e d t o g r a n t t h e m o t i o n w a s n o t a n a p p e a l a b l e

o r d e r

, t h e S t a t e m a i n t a i n e d

, i t c o u l d n o t h a v e k n o w n o r b e e n e x p e c t e d t o f i l e a n o t i c e o f

a p p e a l w i t h i n t w e n t y d a y s o f t h a t d a t e

. T h e S t a t e a r g u e d t h a t “ t h e q u e s t i o n n o w b e c o m e s

w h e t h e r o r n o t t h e C o u r t ’ s s i g n i n g o f t h e o r d e r v e r s u s t h e e n t e r i n g o f i t b y t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k

An identical copy of the proposed order that was attache d to Appellee ’s motion to suppress 5

appea rs on pag e 43 of the Clerk’s Record. On this copy

, howeve r, the word “GRANTE D” is circ led,

the word “DEN I ED” is scra tched out, and a handwr itten notation indicates that it was “[s] igne d the

7 day of J uly

, 2014.” The judge ’s signa ture appea rs on the signa

ture line. I t is file-stampe d at 3:15 t h

p.m. on September 25, 2014, howeve r—the same date as the hear ing on t h e State’s motion for

rec onsideration, which ha d commence d at 1:55 p.m.WACHTENDORF — 6

i s t h e d a t e o f

- - t h e e f f e c t i v e d a t e

. ” T h e t r i a l c o u r t o b s e r v e d t h a t “ y o u t w o c a n f i g h t o u t t h a t

i n t h e C o u r t o f

A p p e a l s

, r i g h t ? ” T h e p a r t i e s a g r e e d

, a n d

, w i t h t h a t

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t a d j o u r n e d

t h e s t a t u s h e a r i n g

, a g a i n w i t h o u t h a v i n g u l t i m a t e l y r u l e d o n t h e S t a t e ’ s m o t i o n t o r e c o n s i d e r

.

T h e c o u r t o f a p p e a l s d i s m i s s e d t h e a p p e a l f o r w a n t o f

j u r i s d i c t i o n o n t h e s t r e n g t h o f

R o s e n b a u m a n d B a g e

, o b s e r v i n g t h a t

, “ [ d ] e s p i t e t h e c r i t i c i s m s e x p r e s s e d [ b y t h e S t a t e ]

a g a i n s t t h e h o l d i n g i n R o s e n b a u m

, t h e [ C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l A p p e a l s ] h a s r e c e n t l y s a n c t i o n e d

t h a t h o l d i n g a g a i n

. ” S t a t e v

. W a c h t e n d o r

f

, 2 0 1 5 W L 8 9 4 7 3 1

, a t * 2 ( c i t i n g S t a t e v

.

S a n a v o n g

x a y

, 4 0 7 S

. W

. 3 d 2 5 2

, 2 5 8

- 5 9 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. 2 0 1 2 ) )

. I n i t s p e t i t i o n f o r

d i s c r e t i o n a r y r e v i e w

, t h e S t a t e r e n e w s i t s c r i t i c i s m o f o u r h o l d i n g s i n R o s e n b a u m a n d B a g e

,

a r g u i n g t h a t t h e y a r e u n j u s t t o t h e S t a t e

, a t l e a s t i n c a s e s i n w h i c h i t h a s r e c e i v e d n o n o t i c e

o f t h e s i g n i n g o f a n o r d e r g r a n t i n g a m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s

. T h e S t a t e c o m p l a i n s t h a t “ [ e ] x i s t i n g

p r e c e d e n t

, a s c u r r e n t l y i n t e r p r e t e d b y

, a t l e a s t

, t h e T h i r d C o u r t o f A p p e a l s

, a l l o w s a [ t r i a l ]

c o u r t t o s i g n a n o r d e r [ g r a n t i n g a m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s ]

, w a i t t w e n t y [

- ] o n e o r m o r e d a y s b e f o r e

f i l i n g t h e o r d e r w i t h t h e d i s t r i c t o r c o u n t y c l e r k o r o t h e r w i s e g i v i n g t h e S t a t e n o t i c e o f t h e

e x i s t e n c e o f s a i d o r d e r

, a n d t h e r e b y e f f e c t i v e l y s t r i p a l t o g e t h e r f r o m t h e S t a t e i t s a b i l i t y t o

a p p e a l

. ” S t a t e ’ s B r i e f a t 1 3

. W e g r a n t e d t h e S t a t e ’ s p e t i t i o n t o a d d r e s s t h i s c o m p l a i n t

.

A N A L Y S I S

T h e S t a t u t e , t h e R u l e , a n d t h e C a s e L a w

T h e S t a t e h a s n o t a l w a y s e n j o y e d a r i g h t t o a p p e a l i n T e x a s

, a n d t h a t r i g h t i s “ a

s t a t u t o r i l y c r e a t e d o n e

. ” S t a t e v

. S e l l e r s

, 7 9 0 S

. W

. 2 d 3 1 6 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. 1 9 9 0 )

. A r t i c l eWACHTENDORF — 7

4 4

. 0 1 o f t h e C o d e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e c u r r e n t l y p e r m i t s t h e S t a t e t o a p p e a l

, a m o n g o t h e r

t h i n g s

, “ a n o r d e r o f a c o u r t i n a c r i m i n a l c a s e i f t h e o r d e r

. . . g r a n t s a m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s

e v i d e n c e [

. ] ” T E X

. C O D E C R IM

. P R O C

. a r t

. 4 4

. 0 1 ( a ) ( 5 )

. B u t t h e S t a t e “ m a y n o t m a k e a n

a p p e a l ” u n d e r A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 “ l a t e r t h a n t h e 2 0 t h d a y a f t e r t h e d a t e o n w h i c h t h e o r d e r

. . . t o

b e a p p e a l e d i s e n t e r e d b y t h e c o u r t

. ” T E X

. C O D E C R IM

. P R O C

. a r t

. 4 4

. 0 1 ( d )

.

T h i s C o u r t w a s f

i r s t c a l l e d u p o n t o c o n s t r u e w h a t “ e n t e r e d b y t h e c o u r t ” m e a n t f o r

p u r p o s e s o f A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d )

, i n 1 9 9 1

. R o s e n b a u m

, 8 1 8 S

. W

. 2 d a t 4 0 2

. T h e r e w e n o t e d t h a t

t h e n

- R u l e 4 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) o f t h e T e x a s R u l e s o f A p p e l l a t e P r o c e d u r e ( s i n c e r e

- c o d i f i e d a s R u l e

2 6

. 2 ( b ) ) g e n e r a l l y p r o v i d e d t h a t a n a p p e a l w a s p e r f e c t e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o a n a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r

w h e n n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i s f i l e d w i t h i n f

i f t e e n d a y s ( n o w t w e n t y ) f r o m “ t h e d a y [ t h e ]

a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r i s s i g n e d b y t h e t r i a l j u d g e [

. ] ” I d

. a t 4 0 0 ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d )

. W e r e c o g n i z e d

t h a t “ t h i s C o u r t h a s l o n g h e l d t h a t t h e s i g n i n g o f a [ n ]

. . . o r d e r i s a f u n c t i o n o f t h e c o u r t

s e p a r a t e a n d d i s t i n c t f

r o m t h e e n t r y o f s a i d

. . . o r d e r i n t o t h e r e c o r d s o f t h e c o u r t

. ” I d

. a t 4 0 1

.

“ E n t r y i n t o t h e r e c o r d s o f t h e c o u r t i s m e r e l y m i n i s t e r i a l i n n a t u r e

. ” I d

. “ A s a p r a c t i c a l

m a t t e r

, ” w e o b s e r v e d i n R o s e n b a u m

, “ a j u d g e m a y n e v e r r e a l l y k n o w w h e n a s i g n e d o r d e r

. . . i s p h y s i c a l l y e n t e r e d i n t o t h e r e c o r d

. T h e r e a r e n o c o n s i s t e n t d e a d l i n e s f o r c l e r i c a l e n t r y

i n t o t h e r e c o r d i n t h e c o u r t s t h r o u g h o u t T e x a s

. ” I d

. a t 4 0 2

. I n o r d e r t o a v o i d t h e a n o m a l y o f

t y i n g t h e i n c e p t i o n o f t h e p e r i o d f o r f i l i n g a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l t o s u c h a n i n d e f i n i t e d a t e

, w e

c h o s e t o c o n s t r u e t h e p h r a s e “ e n t e r e d b y t h e c o u r t ” i n A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d ) t o m e a n t h e s a m e a s

t h e g e n e r a l p r o v i s i o n f

o r p e r f e c t i n g a n a p p e a l i n f

o r m e r R u l e 4 1 ( b ) ( 1 )

, h o l d i n g t h a t “ t h e t e r mWACHTENDORF — 8

‘ e n t e r e d b y t h e c o u r t ’ e n c o m p a s s e s t h e s i g n i n g o f a n o r d e r b y t h e t r i a l j u d g e

. ” I d

. 6

“ E s t a b l i s h i n g a d e f

i n i t e s t a r t i n g d a t e f

o r c a l c u l a t i n g a p p e l l a t e t i m e t a b l e s [

, ] ” w e c o n c l u d e d

,

“ s e r v e s t h e i n t e r e s t s o f a l l p a r t i e s

. ” I d

. A n d w e h e l d t h a t t h e “ d e f i n i t e s t a r t i n g d a t e ” s h o u l d

b e t h e d a t e t h e a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r w a s s i g n e d

. I d

. W e c e m e n t e d t h i s h o l d i n g l e s s t h a n a y e a r

l a t e r i n a m a n d a m u s p r o c e e d i n g

, i n S t a t e e x r e l

. S u t t o n v

. B a g e

, 8 2 2 S

. W

. 2 d a t 5 7

.

B o t h P r e s i d i n g J u d g e M c C o r m i c k a n d J u d g e B a i r d t o o k i s s u e w i t h t h e C o u r t ’ s

c o n s t r u c t i o n o f A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d ) i n t h e s e c a s e s

. R o s e n b a u m

, 8 1 8 S

. W

. 2 d a t 4 0 3

- 0 5 ( B a i r d

,

J

. , j o i n e d b y M c C o r m i c k

, P

. J

. , c o n c u r r i n g ) ; B a g e

, 8 2 2 S

. W

. 2 d a t 5 7 ( M c C o r m i c k

, P

. J

. ,

d i s s e n t i n g ) ; i d

. a t 5 8 ( B a i r d

, J

. , d i s s e n t i n g )

. T h e y a r g u e d t h a t t h e p h r a s e “ e n t e r e d b y t h e

c o u r t ” i n A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d ) i s a l e g a l t e r m o f a r t t h a t t y p i c a l l y r e f e r s

, n o t t o t h e s i g n i n g o f a n

a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r

, b u t “ t o t h e m i n i s t e r i a l a c t o f t h e c l e r k s p r e a d i n g t h e c o u r t ’ s [ o r d e r ] i n t h e

m i n u t e s o f t h e c o u r t

. ” B a g e

, 8 2 2 S

. W

. 2 d a t 5 9 ( B a i r d

, J

. , d i s s e n t i n g ) ( c i t i n g W i l s o n v

. S t a t e

,

6 7 7 S

. W

. 2 d 5 1 8

, 5 2 2 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. 1 9 8 4 )

, w h i c h i n t u r n c i t e d M o o r e v

. S t a t e

, 2 4 5

When the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedur e wer e redr afted

, eff ective in 1997, former 6

Rule 41(b)( 1) was rew ritten. I ronica lly

, under curr ent Rule 26.2(b), now specific ally g overning the

State’s perf

ection of appea l, a State’s notice of appea l from an appea lable order must be filed within

a cer tain period of time “af

ter the day the trial court enter s the order

. . . to be appea led.” T E X

. R.

A P P

. P. 26.2(b). T h u s

, the actua l lang uag e of Article 44.01(d) (“e ntere d by the court” ) now

corr esponds t o the actual lang uag e in Rule 26.2(b) (“the trial court en t er s t h e order”)

, and neither

provision speaks expli citly in terms of when th e t ri al co u rt signs the order

. Stil l, the commentar y

following Rule 26 makes clea r that the 1997 revision was not meant to be substantive. See id

., Notes

and Comments, at 221 (Ve rnon’s 2003); see also

, 60 T E X

. B.J. 900 (1997) (“N onsubstantive chang es

are made in the rule for criminal case s.”). We must presume that the construction that we g ave to the

phrase “ente red by the court” in Rosenbaum has been car ried over into Rule 26.2(b)—na mely

, that

a trial judg e “e nters” a

n appea lable orde r under

Article 44.01 on the date that he signs it.WACHTENDORF — 9

S

. W

. 2 d 4 9 1 ( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. 1 9 5 2 ) )

. M o r e o v e r

, t h e y a r g u e d

, t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e p r o v i s i o n 7

i n f o r m e r R u l e 4 1 ( b ) ( 1 ) g e n e r a l l y f i x e s t h e c o m m e n c e m e n t o f t h e t i m e f

o r f i l i n g a n y n o t i c e

o f a p p e a l t o t h e d a t e a n a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r i s s i g n e d

, A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d ) s h o u l d t r u m p i t

, f o r t w o

r e a s o n s

. F i r s t

, w h e n e v e r a s t a t u t e a n d a r u l e i r r e c o n c i l a b l y c o n f l i c t

, t h e s t a t u t e

— t h e

l e g i s l a t i v e a c t

— a l w a y s c o n t r o l s

. S e c o n d

, s p e c i f i c p r o v i s i o n s g o v e r n o v e r g e n e r a l

. B e c a u s e

A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d ) s p e c i f

i c a l l y f i x e s t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e t i m e f o r t h e S t a t e t o f

i l e a n o t i c e o f

a p p e a l f r o m a n a d v e r s e a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r u n d e r A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( a )

, i t i s m o r e s p e c i f i c t h a n t h e

g e n e r a l

, a n d i n f

e r i o r ( b e c a u s e c o u r t

- m a d e )

, p r o v i s i o n i n R u l e 4 1 ( b ) ( 1 )

. B a g e

, 8 2 2 S

. W

. 2 d a t

5 9 ( B a i r d

, J

. , d i s s e n t i n g )

.

B u t t h e m a

j o r i t y ’ s h o l d i n g t h a t t h e n o t i c e

- o f

- a p p e a l p e r i o d b e g i n s w i t h t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s

s i g n i n g o f t h e a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r c a r r i e d t h e d a y

, a n d i t h a s b e e n i n g r a i n e d i n t h e l a w n o w f o r

t w e n t y

- f i v e y e a r s

. T h i s i s n o t t o s a y

, o f c o u r s e

, t h a t s t a r t i n g t h e p e r i o d f o r f i l i n g a S t a t e ’ s

n o t i c e o f a p p e a l o n t h e d a t e t h e a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r i s s i g n e d ( r a t h e r t h a n t h e d a t e w h e n t h e

c l e r k e n t e r s i t i n t o t h e r e c o r d ) i s n o t w i t h o u t i t s o w n p o t e n t i a l f o r i n d e f i n i t e n e s s

. B a g e i t s e l f

i l l u s t r a t e s a s m u c h

. I n B a g e

, a s i n t h e i n s t a n t c a s e

, t h e S t a t e d i d n o t e v e n l e a r n t h a t t h e t r i a l

c o u r t h a d s i g n e d a n a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r g r a n t i n g a m o t i o n t o q u a s h t h e i n d i c t m e n t u n t i l t h e t h e n

f i f t e e n

- d a y p e r i o d f

o r f i l i n g i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l u n d e r A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d ) h a d a l r e a d y e x p i r e d

.

8 2 2 S

. W

. 2 d a t 5 8 ( M c C o r m i c k

, P

. J

. , d i s s e n t i n g )

. T h i s C o u r t n e v e r t h e l e s s c h o s e t o a d h e r e t o

“I n a criminal proce eding

, a cler k of the district

. . . court shall

. . . rec eive and file all paper s 7

. . . and

. . . perf

orm all other du t i es i m p o s ed on the cler k by law.” T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. art.

2.21(a) (1) & (6). “The cl erk of a district court shall

. . . rec ord the acts and proce eding s of the

court[.] ” T E X

. G O V ’ T C O D E § 51.303(b)( 1).WACHTENDORF — 10

R o s e n b a u m ’ s c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e p h r a s e “ e n t e r e d b y t h e c o u r t ” i n A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d )

, a n d

r e f u s e d t o m a n d a m u s t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k t o a c c e p t t h e S t a t e ’ s u n t i m e l y n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

,

r e a s o n i n g t h a t t h e c l e r k h a d “ n o m i n i s t e r i a l d u t y t o f i l e t h e S t a t e ’ s a p p e a l

. ” I d

. a t 5 7

. O n t h e

s t r e n g t h o f t h e h o l d i n g s i n R o s e n b a u m a n d B a g e

, a n d b e c a u s e “ [ a ] t i m e l y n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

i s n e c e s s a r y t o i n v o k e a c o u r t o f a p p e a l s ’ j u r i s d i c t i o n [

, ] ” O l i v o v

. S t a t e

, 9 1 8 S

. W

. 2 d 5 1 9

, 5 2 2

( T e x

. C r i m

. A p p

. 1 9 9 6 )

, t h e c o u r t o f a p p e a l s i n t h i s c a s e r e g r e t f u l l y d i s m i s s e d t h e S t a t e ’ s

a p p e a l

. W

a c h t e n d o r

f

, 2 0 1 5 W L 8 9 4 7 3 1

, a t * 2

.

T h e S t a t e ’ s C o m p l a i n t

T h e S t a t e d o e s n o t n o w r e i t e r a t e t h e a r g u m e n t i t m a d e a t t h e S e p t e m b e r 2 5 t h h e a r i n g

o n i t s m o t i o n f

o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n ; i t d o e s n o t u r g e u s t o r e v i s i t t h e p h r a s e “ e n t e r e d b y t h e

c o u r t ” u n d e r A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d )

, a n d a s k u s t o r e

- c o n s t r u e i t t o m e a n t h e d a t e t h e a p p e a l a b l e

o r d e r w a s f

i l e

- s t a m p e d

. N o r d o e s t h e S t a t e a s k u s t o e m b r a c e t h e v i e w o f P r e s i d i n g J u d g e

M c C o r m i c k a n d J u d g e B a i r d

, t h a t “ e n t e r e d ” m e a n s s p r e a d o n t h e m i n u t e s o f t h e c o u r t

— a n d

f o r g o o d r e a s o n

. A s t h e f a c t s o f t h i s v e r y c a s e d e m o n s t r a t e

, a d i s t r i c t c l e r k ’ s f i l e m a r k w i l l

n o t a l w a y s c o n s t i t u t e d e f i n i t i v e e v i d e n c e o f w h e n a d o c u m e n t w a s a c t u a l l y “ f i l e d

, ” m u c h l e s s

s p r e a d o n t h e m i n u t e s o f t h e c o u r t

.

“ I n a l o n g l i n e o f c a s e s

, ” t h e T e x a s S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s h e l d t h a t a d o c u m e n t i s “ f i l e d

, ”

n o t w h e n i t i s f

i l e

- s t a m p e d

, b u t “ w h e n i t i s t e n d e r e d t o t h e c l e r k

, o r o t h e r w i s e p u t u n d e r t h e

c u s t o d y o r c o n t r o l o f t h e c l e r k

. ” J a m a r v

. P a t t e r s o n

, 8 6 8 S

. W

. 2 d 3 1 8

, 3 1 9 ( T e x

. 1 9 9 4 )

. 8

See W illiams v. State

, 767 S.W .2d 868, 871 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1989, pet. ref ’d) (“I n civil 8

case s, an instrument is g ener ally deeme d filed when it is left with the cler k reg ardle ss of whether aWACHTENDORF — 11

H e r e

, t h e u n s i g n e d o r d e r ( a s i t w a s a t t a c h e d t o A p p e l l e e ’ s m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s ) w a s o r i g i n a l l y

“ f i l e d ”

— t h a t i s

, t e n d e r e d t o t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k

— a t l e a s t a s o f J a n u a r y 1 6

, 2 0 1 4

, w h e n t h e

m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s i t s e l f w a s f i l e

- s t a m p e d

. B u t

, t h o u g h t h i s p r o p o s e d o r d e r w a s i n t h e d i s t r i c t

c l e r k ’ s f i l e

, n o s u c h o r d e r w a s s i g n e d u n t i l J u l y 7

, 2 0 1 4

. T h e s i g n e d c o p y o f t h e o r d e r w a s

a p p a r e n t l y t e n d e r e d t o t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k a t s o m e p o i n t b e t w e e n J u l y 7 t h

, w h e n t h e d o c k e t

s h e e t i n d i c a t e s i t w a s s i g n e d

, a n d S e p t e m b e r 2 5 t h

, w h e n t h e t r i a l c o u r t d i s c o v e r e d i t

, s i g n e d

a n d d a t e d b u t n o t f

i l e

- s t a m p e d

, i n t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k ’ s f i l e

. B u t ( a s a n t i c i p a t e d i n R o s e n b a u m )

,

t h e r e c o r d d o e s n o t r e v e a l a p a r t i c u l a r d a t e b e t w e e n J u l y 7 t h a n d S e p t e m b e r 2 5 t h w h e n t h e

d i s t r i c t c l e r k a c t u a l l y a c q u i r e d c u s t o d y o r c o n t r o l o f t h e s i g n e d o r d e r

, m u c h l e s s w h e n t h e

s i g n e d o r d e r m i g h t h a v e b e e n e n t e r e d o f r e c o r d

. T h a t i s t o s a y

, w e c a n n o t k n o w w h e n t h e

d i s t r i c t c l e r k p e r f

o r m e d i t s m i n i s t e r i a l f

u n c t i o n o f s p r e a d i n g t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s s i g n e d o r d e r i n

t h e m i n u t e s o f t h e c o u r t

. I t t h e r e f o r e d o e s n o t b e h o o v e t h e S t a t e t o u r g e u s t o p r o c e e d u p o n

P r e s i d i n g J u d g e M c C o r m i c k ’ s a n d J u d g e B a i r d ’ s c o n s t r u c t i o n o f “ e n t e r e d b y t h e c o u r t

. ” T h e

r e c o r d i n t h i s c a s e s i m p l y d o e s n o t r e v e a l a d a t e c e r t a i n u p o n w h i c h i t m a y b e s a i d t h a t t h e

d i s t r i c t c l e r k e n t e r e d t h e c o u r t ’ s o r d e r i n t h e m i n u t e s o f t h e c o u r t

. I n f a c t

, t h e o n l y d a t e

file mark is place d on the instrument. [citation omitted.] We see no rea son why the same rule should

not apply in criminal cases, and we hold that it does.”) ; Perkins v. State , 7 S.W .3d 683, 686 (Tex.

App.—Texarkana 1999, pet. ref ’d) (“A n information is filed when it is delivere d to or left with the

cler k, despite the absenc e of a file stamp on the document.”) ; In re Smith

, 270 S.W .3d 783, 786 (Tex.

Ap p

. — W ac o 2008, no pet. h.) (a document is “g ener ally considere d to have been ‘filed’ ” whe n

tender ed to the cle rk, whe ther or not it is file-mar ked).WACHTENDORF — 12

c e r t a i n i n t h e p r e s e n t c a s e i s t h e d a t e t h e o r d e r w a s s i g n e d

. 9

T h e f a c t o f t h e m a t t e r i s t h a t

, i n a n y g i v e n c a s e

, t h e r e w i l l b e a p o t e n t i a l n o t i c e

p r o b l e m f

o r t h e S t a t e r e g a r d l e s s o f w h e t h e r t h e d a t e f o r b e g i n n i n g t h e p e r i o d f o r f i l i n g i t s

n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i s t h e d a t e t h a t t h e o r d e r w a s s i g n e d o r t h e d a t e t h a t i t w a s s p r e a d o n t h e

m i n u t e s o f t h e c o u r t

. W h i c h e v e r o f t h e s e e v e n t s i s d e e m e d t o t r i g g e r t h e a p p e l l a t e t i m e t a b l e

,

t h e S t a t e m a y n o t b e c o m e a c t u a l l y a w a r e o f t h a t e v e n t b e f

o r e t h e t i m e h a s r u n o u t t o f i l e i t s

n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

. A c c o r d i n g l y

, t h e S t a t e d o e s n o t n o w v i g o r o u s l y a r g u e t h a t R o s e n b a u m a n d

B a g e s h o u l d b e o v e r r u l e d ; i t s i m p l y a r g u e s t h a t t h e s e p r e c e d e n t s s h o u l d n o t b e s l a v i s h l y

f o l l o w e d i n a n y c a s e i n w h i c h i t h a s n o t r e c e i v e d n o t i c e

, o r o t h e r w i s e a c q u i r e d k n o w l e d g e

,

t h a t a n a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r g r a n t i n g a m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s h a s i n f a c t b e e n s i g n e d

. I t u r g e s u s t o

b e g i n i t s n o t i c e

- o f

- a p p e a l t i m e t a b l e o n S e p t e m b e r 2 5 t h

— n o t n e c e s s a r i l y b e c a u s e t h a t w a s

t h e d a t e t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s o r d e r w a s e v e n t u a l l y f i l e

- s t a m p e d

, b u t b e c a u s e t h e S t a t e l a c k e d a n y

a c t u a l a w a r e n e s s o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e s i g n e d o r d e r s o o n e r t h a n t h e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s d i s c o v e r y

o f i t i n t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k ’ s f i l e o n t h a t d a t e

. T h e S t a t e a r g u e s t h a t

, a b s e n t n o t i c e o r a c t u a l

The only other date cer

tain in this case is the date the signe d order was ultimately filed- 9

stamped, on September 25th. But that was obviously not the date on which the signe d order was

tender ed t o t h e d i s t rict cler k, and thus “filed,” much less when it may have been sprea d on the

minutes o f the court. To trea t September 25th as the opera tive date to beg in the notice-of -appe al

t imetable would be tantamount to allowing the State to appea l, not the g ranting of the m o t i o n t o

suppress, but the ref

usal of the trial court to rule in the State’s favor on its motion for rec onsideration

of the g ranting of Appellee ’s motion to suppress, which was the motion that was actua lly hear d on

September 25th. But, as Appellee pointed out to the trial court, we have unanimously held that any

ruling on such a S t at e’ s m o tion for rec onsideration does not constitute an appea lable order under

Article 44.01. State v. Cowsert

, 207 S.W .3d 347, 351 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). I f, by file-stamping

the order on September 25th, the trial court meant it to co u n t as an order overr uling the State’s

motion to reconsider, tha t order w as simply not appea lable under Cowsert

.WACHTENDORF — 13

k n o w l e d g e o f t h e s i g n e d o r d e r

, i t w o u l d s i m p l y b e u n f a i r t o h o l d t h e S t a t e t o t h e d a t e t h e

o r d e r w a s s i g n e d

.

J u d i c i a l l y R e q u i r e d N o t i c e

I n e s s e n c e

, w h a t t h e S t a t e w o u l d h a v e u s d o i s t o a d o p t a r u l e

— a s a m a t t e r o f

d e c i s i o n a l l a w

— s i m i l a r t o R u l e 3 0 6 a o f t h e T e x a s R u l e s o f C i v i l P r o c e d u r e

. L i k e A r t i c l e

4 4

. 0 1 o f t h e C o d e o f C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e a n d R u l e 2 6

. 2 ( b ) o f t h e R u l e s o f A p p e l l a t e

P r o c e d u r e

, R u l e 3 0 6 a p r o v i d e s t h a t t h e t i m e t a b l e s f o r v a r i o u s p r o c e d u r a l r e q u i r e m e n t s b e g i n s

o n “ [ t ] h e d a t e [ t h e ] o r d e r i s s i g n e d a s s h o w n o f r e c o r d [

. ] ” T E X

. R

. C IV

. P R O C

. 3 0 6 a ( 1 )

. B u t

u n l i k e A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 o r R u l e 2 6

. 2 ( b )

, R u l e 3 0 6 a p r o v i d e s t h a t

, w h e n a n a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r i s

s i g n e d

, t h e c o u r t ’ s c l e r k “ s h a l l i m m e d i a t e l y g i v e n o t i c e t o t h e p a r t i e s

. . . t h a t t h e

. . . o r d e r

w a s s i g n e d

. ” I

d

. ( 3 )

. I f a p a r t y c a n p r o v e t o t h e t r i a l c o u r t t h a t i t f a i l e d t o r e c e i v e s u c h n o t i c e

o r a c q u i r e a c t u a l n o t i c e w i t h i n t w e n t y d a y s o f t h e s i g n e d o r d e r

, t h e n t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e

p r o c e d u r a l t i m e t a b l e s i s p o s t p o n e d u n t i l t h e d a t e o f n o t i c e o r a c t u a l k n o w l e d g e

, “ w h i c h e v e r

o c c u r r e d f

i r s t [

. ] ” I d

. ( 4 ) & ( 5 ) ; J

o h n v

. M a r s h a l l He a l t h S e r v i c e s

, I n c

. , 5 8 S

. W

. 3 d 7 3 8

, 7 4 0

-

4 1 ( T e x

. 2 0 0 1 )

. T h e S t a t e u r g e s u s t o a d o p t a s i m i l a r r u l e t h a t w o u l d d e l a y t h e i n c e p t i o n o f

t h e p e r i o d w i t h i n w h i c h i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i s d u e u n t i l s u c h t i m e a s i t b e c o m e s a w a r e t h a t

t h e o r d e r g r a n t i n g t h e m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s h a s b e e n s i g n e d

.

R u l e 3 0 6 a i s m o r e o r l e s s a n o m n i b u s p r o v i s i o n

, i n t e n d e d t o a p p l y e q u a l l y t o a l l

p a r t i e s a n d t o n u m e r o u s p r o c e d u r a l t i m e t a b l e s i n c i v i l p r a c t i c e

. H e r e

, t h e S t a t e w o u l d h a v e

u s c a r v e o u t a u n i q u e r u l e t h a t a p p l i e s t o o n l y o n e p a r t y ( t h e S t a t e ) a n d t o o n e p a r t i c u l a rWACHTENDORF — 14

p r o c e d u r a l t i m e t a b l e ( i n t e r l o c u t o r y n o t i c e o f a p p e a l )

. W e a r e h e s i t a n t t o f a s h i o n s u c h a

s p e c i f i c p r o c e d u r a l r u l e b y j u d i c i a l f i a t a n d o u t o f w h o l e c l o t h

. W e r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e T e x a s

S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s c a u t i o n e d t h e l o w e r a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s “ t o c o n s t r u e t h e R u l e s o f A p p e l l a t e

P r o c e d u r e r e a s o n a b l y

, y e t l i b e r a l l y

, s o t h a t t h e r i g h t t o a p p e a l i s n o t l o s t b y i m p o s i n g

r e q u i r e m e n t s n o t a b s o l u t e l y n e c e s s a r y t o e f f e c t t h e p u r p o s e o f a r u l e

. ” V e r b u r g t v

. D o r n e r

,

9 5 9 S

. W

. 2 d 6 1 5

, 6 1 6

- 1 7 ( T e x

. 1 9 9 7 )

. B u t t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t h a s r e c i p r o c a l l y r e c o g n i z e d t h a t

t h i s C o u r t ’ s “ a p p r o a c h t o t h e p e r f e c t i o n o f a p p e a l s i n c r i m i n a l c a s e s h a s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f

i c a n t l y

f r o m [ i t s o w n ] m o r e l i b e r a l a p p r o a c h

. ” I d

. a t 6 1 6 ( c i t i n g O l i v o v

. S t a t e

, 9 1 8 S

. W

. 2 d 5 1 9 ( T e x

.

C r i m

. A p p

. 1 9 9 6 )

— t h e v e r y c a s e t h a t t h e c o u r t o f a p p e a l s r e l i e d u p o n i n t h i s c a s e t o d i s m i s s

t h e S t a t e ’ s a p p e a l )

. W e s h a l l n o t i m p o r t i n t o A r t i c l e 4 4

. 0 1 ( d ) a n d R u l e 2 6

. 2 ( b ) a n e l a b o r a t e

n o t i c e r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t t h e L e g i s l a t u r e i t s e l f d i d n o t s e e f i t t o i m p o s e

. W e t h i n k t h a t t h e

S t a t e ’ s s u g g e s t i o n t h a t w e a p p e n d a n o t i c e p r o v i s i o n n o t c u r r e n t l y i n e i t h e r p r o v i s i o n i s m o r e

a p p r o p r i a t e l y a d d r e s s e d t o t h i s C o u r t ’ s R u l e s C o m m i t t e e

, a s a n e x e r c i s e o f o u r l i m i t e d b u t

l e g i s l a t i v e l y e n d o w e d r u l e m a k i n g a u t h o r i t y

— p e r h a p s t o r e v i s e c u r r e n t R u l e 2 6

. 2 ( b ) t o a d d

s u c h a n o t i c e r e q u i r e m e n t

. S e e A c t s 1 9 8 5

, 6 9 t h L e g

. , c h

. 6 8 5

, § 1

, p

. 2 4 7 2

, e f f

. J u n e 1

, 1 9 8 5

( g r a n t i n g t h i s C o u r t “ r u l e m a k i n g p o w e r t o p r o m u l g a t e r u l e s o f p o s t t r i a l

, a p p e l l a t e

, a n d

r e v i e w p r o c e d u r e i n c r i m i n a l c a s e s e x c e p t t h a t i t s r u l e s m a y n o t a b r i d g e

, e n l a r g e

, o r m o d i f y

t h e s u b s t a n t i v e r i g h t s o f a l i t i g a n t ” ) ; T E X

. G O V ’ T C O D E § 2 2

. 1 0 8 ( a ) ( s a m e )

. W e c e r t a i n l y 1 0

“I nhere nt in the [C ]ourt of [C ]rimi nal [A] ppea l s ’s fi n al appellate jurisdiction

. . . is the 1 0

authority to adopt or make [as a mat t er o f d ecisional law] proce dural require ments for the trial,

appea l, and revie w of criminal case s. These rules m u s t n o t co n flict with any statutory or

constitutional provisions, and they must be ‘re asonable .’” G eorg e E. Dix & John M. Schmolesky

,WACHTENDORF — 15

c a n n o t f a u l t t h e c o u r t o f a p p e a l s f o r d e c l i n i n g t o m a n u f

a c t u r e s u c h a n o t i c e r u l e

, s u a s p o n t e

,

s i m p l y t o a v o i d t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n a l r a m i f i c a t i o n s o f t h e S t a t e ’ s t a r d y n o t i c e o f a p p e a l i n t h i s

c a s e

.

I n a n y e v e n t

, t h e S t a t e w a s n o t e n t i r e l y p o w e r l e s s t o p r e s e r v e i t s i n t e r e s t s i n t h i s c a s e

.

T h e r e a r e a c t i o n s i t c o u l d h a v e t a k e n t o e n s u r e a t i m e l y n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

. F i r s t o f a l l

, i t i s

u n c o n t e s t e d t h a t t h e s i g n e d o r d e r w a s p l a c e d i n t h e c l e r k ’ s r e c o r d a t s o m e p o i n t b e t w e e n J u l y

7 t h a n d S e p t e m b e r 2 5 t h

. F r o m t h a t ( a l b e i t u n d i s c l o s e d ) p o i n t o n

, t h e S t a t e w a s p l a c e d o n

c o n s t r u c t i v e n o t i c e t h a t t h e o r d e r g r a n t i n g A p p e l l e e ’ s m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s h a d b e e n s i g n e d

. 1 1

A t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e h e a r i n g o n J u l y 7 t h

, t h e t r i a l c o u r t p l a i n l y a n n o u n c e d i t s i n t e n t i o n

40 T E X A S P R A C T I C E : C R I M I N A L P R A C T I C E A N D P R O C E D U R E § 1:3, at 5 (3rd ed. 2011). For example,

State v. Cullen , 195 S.W .3d 696 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006), see note 2, ante , “proba bly ref lects [this

C o u rt ’s] exercise of an inhere nt power to make proce dural rules by decisional law. ” Di x &

Schmolesky at 6. Neve rtheless, since the L eg islature conferr ed rulemaking authority on the C ourt

in 1985, that “rule making power may require the [C ]ourt of [C ]rimi nal [A] ppeals t o m ake some

chang es in the law by

exercising that [rulemaking] authority rathe r than c onstruing [as a ma tter of

decisional law] a rule as adopted.” Id

. § 1:10, at 13. And “substantive chang es in court rules should

arg uably be made by exercise of the [C ]ourt’s authority to amend or modify its rules rathe r than by

judicial construction. Such modification often aff ects the interests of persons not parties to particula r

litigation. The rule-a

mending p ro ce s s p rovides those parties a faire r opportunity for input.” Id

. §

2:35, at 76. Moreove r, “[r]ul emaking authority is almost cer tainly g rante d [by the L eg islature] to the

courts with the understanding it—rather than j udicial construction—will be used for g ener al

modification of rules once promulga ted.” Id

. at 77. W e will not “construe ” either Article 44.01 or

Rule 26.2(b) to contain an elabor ate notice require ment that finds no source whatsoeve r, expli cit or

implicit, i n the ac tual lang uag e of e ither provision.

“A p er s o n h as n o tice of a fac t

. . . if that person [among other things] is considere d as 1 1

having been able to asce rtain it by chec king an officia l filing or rec ording .” Black’ s Law Dictionary

1227 (10th ed. 2014). I ndeed, the State seems to conce de that filing of the signe d order would suffice

to provide ade quate notice when it complained tha t a trial cour t could thwart its rig ht to appeal by

waiting more than twenty d ay s t o fi l e its signe d order or “ otherwise g iv[ e] the State notice of the

exis tence of said orde r[.] ” State’s B rief a t 15 (emphasis adde d).WACHTENDORF — 16

t o g r a n t t h e m o t i o n

, a n d t h e S t a t e c o u l d h a v e e x e r c i s e d d i l i g e n c e t o m o n i t o r t h e d i s t r i c t

c l e r k ’ s r e c o r d f

o r t h e f i l i n g o f a s i g n e d o r d e r f

r o m t h a t p o i n t f

o r w a r d

. I n s t e a d

, t h e S t a t e f i l e d

i t s m o t i o n f

o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f A p p e l l e e ’ s m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s w i t h o u t ( b y i t s o w n i m p l i c i t

a d m i s s i o n ) f

i r s t c h e c k i n g t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k ’ s r e c o r d f o r a s i g n e d o r d e r

. I n d e e d

, f o r a l l t h a t t h e

a p p e l l a t e r e c o r d s u g g e s t s

, t h e S t a t e w a s s i m p l y u n a w a r e o f t h e h o l d i n g s o f R o s e n b a u m a n d

B a g e

, w h i c h p l a i n l y a n d c o n s i s t e n t l y i d e n t i f y t h e s i g n i n g o f t h e o r d e r a s t h e e v e n t t h a t 1 2

c o m m e n c e s t h e t i m e t a b l e f o r f i l i n g i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

.

W h a t i s m o r e

, t h e S t a t e c o u l d h a v e b e e n f a r m o r e p r o a c t i v e i n p r o t e c t i n g i t s r i g h t t o

a p p e a l i n t h i s c a s e

. I n a d d i t i o n t o m o n i t o r i n g t h e d i s t r i c t c l e r k ’ s r e c o r d

, t h e S t a t e c o u l d h a v e

f i l e d i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l a t a n y t i m e a f t e r t h e t r i a l c o u r t a n n o u n c e d i t s i n t e n t i o n t o g r a n t t h e

m o t i o n t o s u p p r e s s

— o r e v e n a f t e r t h e t r i a l c o u r t f

i r s t t o o k t h e m o t i o n u n d e r a d v i s e m e n t o n

F e b r u a r y 1 4 t h

, s i g n a l i n g t h a t i t w a s t a k i n g t h e m o t i o n s e r i o u s l y

. I t i s t r u e

, o f c o u r s e

, t h a t t h e

t r i a l c o u r t ’ s o r a l p r o n o u n c e m e n t s o n t h e r e c o r d d o n o t c o n s t i t u t e a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r s

. S t a t e v

.

S a n a v o n g

x a y

, 4 0 7 S

. W

. 3 d a t 2 5 8

. A n d

, i n a n y e v e n t

, t h e S t a t e w a s a p p a r e n t l y w a i t i n g f o r

A p p e l l e e t o p r o v i d e t h e p r o p o s e d f i n d i n g s o f f

a c t a n d c o n c l u s i o n s o f l a w t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t

h a d r e q u e s t e d o n J u l y 7 t h

. H a d t h e S t a t e f i l e d i t s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l b e f o r e t h e o r d e r w a s

s i g n e d

, i t w o u l d c e r t a i n l y h a v e b e e n d e e m e d p r e m a t u r e

. B u t t h e R u l e s o f A p p e l l a t e

P r o c e d u r e d o n o t p r o h i b i t t h e f i l i n g o f a p r e m a t u r e n o t i c e o f a p p e a l ; i n f a c t

, t h e y e x p r e s s l y

As we have alre ady observe d, see text at pag e 5-6, ante

, as late as the hear ing on November 1 2

6th, the State arg ued that “the question now become s whether or not the Court’s signing of the order

versus the e ntering of it by the district cler

k is the date of - - the e ffe ctive date .”WACHTENDORF — 17

r e c o g n i z e t h e p r e m a t u r e f i l i n g o f a n o t i c e o f a p p e a l

, s p e c i f i c a l l y m a k i n g i t “ e f

f e c t i v e a n d

d e e m e d f

i l e d o n t h e s a m e d a y

, b u t a f t e r

. . . t h e a p p e a l a b l e o r d e r [ w a s ] s i g n e d b y t h e t r i a l

c o u r t

. ” T E X

. R

. A P P

. P

. 2 7

. 1 ( b )

. T h e S t a t e e x e r c i s e d n o s u c h d i l i g e n c e i n t h i s c a s e

. 1 3

C O N C L U S I O N

F o r t h e r e a s o n s g i v e n

, w e c a n n o t c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e c o u r t o f a p p e a l s e r r e d t o f o l l o w

o u r p r e c e d e n t s a n d d i s m i s s t h e S t a t e ’ s a p p e a l f o r l a c k o f j u r i s d i c t i o n

. W e a f f i r m i t s j u d g m e n t

.

D E L I V E R E D : N o v e m b e r 1 8

, 2 0 1 5

P U B L I S H

The State complains that an unscrupulous trial court could insulate its ruling from appellate 1 3

revie w and altog ether rob the State of its rig ht to interlocutory ap p ea l o f a motion to suppress by

delibera tely signing an order gra nting the motion an d t h en withholding the order from the district

cler k for twenty day s. There is no sug g estion of such conduct in this case

. And even if we share d the

State’s poi nt of vi ew, we would observe that it is wholly within the State’s ability to obviate such

machinations by

filing a prema ture notice of appe al as we have sug g ested in the text.