Opinion filed January 6 , 201 7



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

____ ___ ____ No. 11

- 1 6

- 00 35 1

- CR

_____ ___ ___ ANGELITA FERNANDEZ , Appellant

V.
THE S TATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 32nd District Court Mitchell County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 7560

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Angelita Fernandez has filed a n untimely notice of appeal from a conviction
for the third

- degree felony offense of “prohibited item in a correctional facility

. ” We dismiss the appeal.
The documents on file in th is case indicate that Appellant’s sentence was imposed on June 8 , 201 6 , and that h er notice of appeal was filed in the district clerk’s
office on December 9 , 2016 , six months after Appellant was sentenc ed

. P ursuant to2

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.2 (a) , a notice of appeal is due to be filed either (1) within thirty days after the date that sentence is imposed in open court or (2) if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial, within ninety days after the date that sentence is imposed in open cour t. A notice of appeal must be in writing and filed with the clerk
of the trial court. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.2(c)(1 ) . The documents on file in this court

re flect that Appellant timely filed a motion for new trial but that she did not file her notice of appe al until 184 days after her sentence was imposed . The notice of appeal was, therefore, untimely. Absent a timely filed notice of appeal or the granting of a timely motion for extension of time, we do not have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. Slato n v. State , 981 S.W.2d 208 , 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State , 918 S.W.2d 519 , 522

– 23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Rodarte v. State , 860 S.W.2d 108 , 110 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993).
When th e appeal w as filed in this court , we notified Appellant by letter that the notice of appeal appeared to be untimely and that the appeal may be dismissed for want of jurisdiction

. We requested that Appellant respond to our letter and show grounds to continue

. Appellant promptly responded by fi ling a sworn statement in support of an

out

- of

- time appeal. In the statement, Appellant indicates that she received
ineffective assistance from her court

- appointed trial counsel who filed the motion for new trial but failed to file a motion to withdraw or a notice of appeal despi te trial counsel’s knowledge that, at the time of sentencing, the trial court granted Appellant an appeal bond. We have considered Appellant’s response; however, we are without authority to proceed with this appeal. Neither the trial court nor this cour t has jurisdiction to grant an out

- of

- time appeal. Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure vests complete jurisdiction over postconviction relief from final felony convictions3

in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A N N

. art. 11.07 (West 2015 ); Hoang v. State , 872 S.W.2d 694, 697 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Ater v. Eighth Ct. of Appeals , 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). The Court of Criminal Appeals is the only court with jurisdiction to consider a motion for an out

of

- time appeal. See Ater , 802 S.W.2d at 243. The appropriate vehicle for Appellant

to seek an out

- of

- time appeal is for h er to pursu e a writ of habeas corpus from the Court of Criminal Appeals pursuant to Article 11.07. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

January 6 , 201 7 Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., Willson , J., and Bailey, J.