Opinion filed April 23, 2021

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________ 

No. 11-21-00036-CR 

___________ 

JASON ROY LEBARON, Appellant

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 42nd District Court 

Taylor County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 28759A

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

A jury convicted Jason Roy Lebaron, Appellant, of the offense of harassment 

of a public servant (Count I) and the offense of criminal mischief (Count II). For 

the first count, Appellant’s punishment was assessed at confinement for two years in 

the Correctional Institutions Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice 

and a fine of $525. For the second count, punishment was assessed at confinement 

in a state jail for 180 days and a fine of $3,025. The trial court suspended the 

imposition of the confinement portion of both sentences and the fine in the first count
2

and placed Appellant on community supervision for four years. Appellant

subsequently filed a notice of appeal. Because the notice of appeal was not filed 

timely, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. 

Pursuant to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, a notice of appeal is due 

to be filed either (1) within thirty days after the date that sentence is imposed or 

suspended in open court or (2) if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial, 

within ninety days after the date that sentence isimposed or suspended in open court. 

TEX.R. APP. P. 26.2(a). A notice of appeal must be in writing and filed with the clerk 

of the trial court. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(c)(1). The documents on file in this appeal 

indicate that Appellant’s sentences were imposed on October 28, 2020, that the

motion for new trial was filed one day late, and that Appellant filed his notice of 

appeal on March 19, 2021, 142 days after his sentences were 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. Slaton 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 the appeal was filed in this court, we notified Appellant that the notice 

of appeal appeared to be untimely and that the appeal may be dismissed for want of 

jurisdiction. We requested a response showing grounds to continue this appeal. 

In his response, counsel for Appellant acknowledges the “missed” timeline 

and asserts that he is now trying to correct it. Counsel stated that he was hired on 

November 30, 2020. According to this court’s calculation, November 30 was the 

due date for the motion for new trial, and absent a timely motion for new trial,

November 30 was also the due date for the notice of appeal. Counsel asserts that 

this court has discretion in the matter and that “this appeal should be perfected in the 
3

interest of justice.” This court, however, has no such discretion; we are not 

authorized to grant a request for an out-of-time appeal. See Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 

210. In his response, Appellant also addresses the substantive merits of his wouldbe appeal. Appellant has not provided this court with any grounds upon which this 

appeal may be continued. Because the notice of appeal was not timely filed, we 

have no jurisdiction over this appeal and must dismiss it. See Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 

210. 

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. 

PER CURIAM

April 23, 2021

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 

Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J., 

Trotter, J., and Williams, J.