1 ... S ee T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH
NO . 2- 08- 265- CR
M I CH AE LE . GR ANT AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M THE 97TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F CLAY CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1

----- ----- -- A ppel l antM i chael E. G r ant , pr o se, at t em pt s t o appeal f r om t he di st r i ct
cou rt ’ s dec i si on th a t i t h ad no j ur i sd i ct i on ov erhi s not i ce ofap pea l f r om t he
m u n ic ip a l c o u rta n d h is “ M o t io n t o E n t e r a P le a o f G u ilt yin E x c h a n g e f o rT im e S er ved on Ti cket s and C our tC ost s. ” Because no fin a l judgm entw as ever ent er ed i n t he m uni ci pal co urt , an d be ca us e t he di st r i ct cou rt w oul d notha ve2

had j ur i sd i ct i on ov eran app ea l f r om t he m uni ci pal cou rt eve n i f a f i nal j udgm ent had be en ent er ed, w e a l so l ac k j ur i sd i ct i on, an d s o w e d i sm i sst he app ea l f or
w a n t o f j u ri s d i c ti o n . S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 2 5 .2 , 4 3 .2 (f); se e a l so T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 3 0 .0 0 0 1 4 (a ) (V e r n o n S u p p . 2 0 0 8 ) ( p r o v id in g t h a tt h e c o u n t yc o u rt s in t h e c o u n t yi n w h ic h t h e m u n ic ip a lit yis lo c a t e d h a v e ju r is d ic t io n o v e ra p p e a ls fro m a m u n i c i p a l c o u rt). G ran t r e c e i v e d a c i tati o n o n S e p tem b e r 1 6 , 2 0 0 3 , fo r dri v i n g eigh ty-tw o
m i l e s p e r ho u r i n a s i x ty-fi v e -m i l e -pe r - h o u r zo n e . H e su b se q u e n tl yfai l e d to appeari n t he m uni ci pal cour t , on S ept em ber 30 , 20 03 , r esul t i ng i n an addi t i onal
c i ta ti o n fo r “ fa i l u re to a p p e a r.” G ra nt w a s c on vi c t e d of a gg r a va t e d r ob be r y i n 1984 a nd s e nt e n c e d to t hi rt y ye a r s ’ c on f i ne m e nt . He w a s c on vi c t e d of po s s e s s i on of c oc a i ne i n 2004
a n d se n ten c e d to 1 8 0 d a y s’ c o n fi n e m e n t. H e h a s s u b se q u e n tl yatte m p ted to t r ade gui l t y pl ea s t o t he sp ee di ng a nd f ai l ur e- t o- app ea rci t at i ons i n e xch ang e f or t i m e a l r ea dy s er ved on t hes e o t herco nvi ct i ons i n t he j u s ti ce co urt , t he
m u n i c i p a l co u rt , th e d i stri c t co u rt , a n d n o w this co u rt . I n M ay 20 07 , G r ant re c e iv ed a not i ce f r om t he j ust i ce oft he peace, P rec i n c t N o . 1 o f C l a yC o u n ty, i n fo rm i n g h i m as foll o w s w i th reg a rd to h i s tw o ci t at i ons:2 ... I ti s app ar ent t hat t he out st and i ng ci t at i ons ha ve ca us ed G r ants om e

har dshi p, as he s t at es i n hi s f i l i ngs t hat havi ng an ou t st andi ng w ar r anton t hese c i ta ti o n s p re v e n ts h i m fro m b e i n g p ro m o te d to “ S ta te A p p ro v e d T ru s te e II ,” pr event s hi m f r om at t endi ng som e vocat i onal pr ogr am s, and bl ocks t he r enew al o fh is d r iv e r ’s lic e n s e , w h ic h w ill a f f e c t h is liv e lih o o d a s a t r u c k d r iv e r u p o n h is event ual r el ease f r om j ai l . H e als o st at es t hat , i fhe i s r el eased on par ol e, get t i ng a r r es t ed f orth e c i t at i ons w i l l vi ol at e h i s par ol e a nd he w i l l t hen be r et ur ned to p ri s o n , “ a h ar ds hi p a nd a no w i n s i t uat i on f oral l i nvol ved . ” The i deal sol ut i on w oul d be f or G r ant t o pl ead gui l t y or nol o contender e and t o pay hi s f i nesf ort he t w o c i t at i ons ; how eve r , he al l ege s t hat he i s “i n pov ert y a nd w i l l c o n ti n u e to b e th ro u g h o u t th i s ti m e .” 3 P L E AS E B E AD VI S E D W E AR E NO L ONGE R AB L E T O GI VE Y OU T I M E S E R VE D ON A C I T AT I ON U NL E S S YOU AR E AR R E S T E D A ND TAK E N TO J AI L F OR THATCHARGE . YOU W I L LNE E D TO M AKE ARRA NG EM ENTS TO P A Y YO UR FI NE W HEN EVER YOU ARE R E L E AS E D. I F Y OU H AVE A D R I VE R [ ‘ S ] L I CE NS E Y OU W I L LNOT B E A B L E T O G E T ITR E N E W E D U N T ILY O U R F IN E IS P A ID . H e at t em pt ed t o appeal t hi s t o t he m uni ci pal cour t , a nd t hen t o t he di st r i ct
c o u rt . 2 In S e p te m b e r 2 0 0 7 , t h e C l a yC o u n tyd i s tri c t c l e rks e n t h i m a l e tte r,
r et ur ni ng t he “M ot i on t o Ent er a Pl ea of G ui l t y i n Exc han ge f or Ti m e Ser ved on Ti cket s and C our tC ost s, ” because i t w as t he di st r i ctcl er k’ s under st andi ng t hat t he di st r i ctco urtdi d notha ve j ur i sd i ct i on. Gr antde m and ed t hat i tbe f i l ed, an d i n N ovem ber20 07 , t he di st r i ctat t or ney senthi m a l et t er , st at i ng t hat [ t ] he D i st r i ct C l er k has f i l ed t he m ot i on a tyou ri ns i st enc e, butt he rel i e f yo u a r e r e q u e sti n g ca n n o t be g ran ted b ythe D i stri c t C o u rt . I t h a s n o j u ri sd i c ti o n o v e r m a tter[ s] i n m u n i c i p a l co u rt s. T h e co u n ty c o u rth a s ju r is d ic t io n o v e ra p p e a ls f r o m c o u n t y c o u r t s ift h a tis w hatyou w i sh to p u r sue. A m ot i on of t he t ype you have f i l ed4

s h o u ld b e f ile d w it h t h e m u n i c ip a l c o u rtit s e lf , w h ic h m ig h tw e ll gr antyou rm ot i on on s ubm i ss i on ofa p l e a ofgui l t y bym ai l f r om you. T h e D i st r i ctCourt , on t he ot herha nd, i s si m pl y w i t hout j ur i sdi ct i on t o heart he m at t er s you r ai se. U n d e terred , G ran t f i l e d a n o ti c e o f ap p e a l w i th this co u rt . O n August1, 2008 , w e not i f i ed G r ant t hat w e w er e c onc er ned t hatt he
cou rtm i ghtnotha ve j ur i sd i ct i on ov ert hi s app ea l bec aus e t he t r i al cou rt had not
e n te re d a n ya p p e a l a b l e o rd e rs . S e eMc Ko wn v. S tate , 915 S. W . 2d 160, 161 (T e x . A p p .— F o rtW o rt h 1 9 9 6 , n o p e t. ). W e sta ted th a t u n l e ss h e o r a n yp a rt y desi r i ng t o conti nue t he appeal f i l ed w i t h t he cour t w i t hi n t en days a r esponse sh ow i ng gr oundsf orco nt i nui ng t he app ea l , t he app ea l w oul d be di sm i ss ed f or
w antofj ur i sd i ct i on. Gr antf i l ed a l et t erw i t h t hi s cou rten cl os i n g a l l oft he pr ec edi ng i nf or m at i on. U n d e r T e x a s R u l e o f A p p e l l a te P ro c e d u re 2 6 .2 , to p e rfe c t a n a p p e a l , a def endan ti n a cr i m i nal case m ustf i l e a not i ce ofappeal “w i t hi n 3 0 d ays af t er t he day s en ten c e i

s i mp o s e d o r s usp en de d i n op en c o urt, or af t er t he dayt he tri a l co urten t er s an appeal able order . ” T EX . R. A PP . P. 2 6 . 2 ( a)( 1 ) ( em p h a s is
a d d e d ) . A n o t ic e o fa p p e a l t h a tc o m p lie s w it h t h e re q u ir e m e n t s o fru le 2 6 is
e s s e n ti a l to v e s t th i s c o u rt w i th j u ri s d i c ti o n . Id .; se e a l so T EX . R. A PP . P. 2 5 .2 (a )(2 ) (req u i ri n g th a t th e tri a l c o u rt e n te r a c e rti fi c a ti o n o f th e d e fe n d a n t’s ri g h t to a p p e a l e a c h ti m e i t e n te rs a j u d g m e n t o f g u i l t o r o th e r app e a la b leo rd e r).5

H er e, no sent ence has yetbeen i m posed f orG r ant ’ s c ita ti ons— he has
m er el y at t em pt ed t o bar gai n w i t h each cour t , i ncl udi ng t hi s one, t o t r ade t i m eser ved on ot herof f enses t o r esol ve hi s t w o ci t at i ons. A nd no or der s have been
e n t e r e d in a n yc o u rtw it h in w h ic h G r a n t h a s f ile d h is m o t io n . B e c a u s e n o f in a l, app ea l abl e o r derha s bee n e nt er ed i n t hi s ca se , w e d i sm i sst he app ea l f orw ant
o f j u ri s d i c ti o n . S eeT EX . R. A PP . P. 25. 2, 26. 2, 4 3 .2 (f); se ealso Ma rti n v. S tate , 77 S. W . 3d 85 3, 85 5 ( Tex . A pp. — A m ar i l l o 2 00 2, no pet . ) ( di sm i ssi ng app eal fo r w a n t o f j u ri s d i c ti o n o n s i m i l a r fa c ts ).

P E R CU R I AM P A N E L : M C C O Y , J .; C A Y C E , C .J .; a n d L IV IN G S T O N , J . DO NO T P UBLI SH T EX . R. A PP . P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Aug us t14, 2008