### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-13-00642- CR

Sean Will iam s, Appellan t

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F B ELL COUNTY , 27TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 42,7 23, TH E H ONO RAB LE WI LLIAM C. B LACK, JUDGE P RESIDING

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

I n 1992, Sean Wil liams wa s ch ar ged with the offe nse of capital murder. On 1 October 14, 1993, pursuant to a plea barg ain, he pled guilty to the lesser- included offe nse of murder and was sentenc ed to confine ment for life in the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice. Wil liams 2 has now filed a pro se document seeking permission to appea l his conviction, which the district cler k forwa rded to this Court as a notice of appea l. For the rea sons that follow, we dismiss this attempted appea l for wa

nt of jurisdiction.

See Act of May 28, 1973, 63d L eg ., ch. 426, art. 2, § 1, 1993 Tex. Gen. L aws 1122, 1123, 1 amende d by Act of May 27, 1983, 68th L eg ., ch. 97 7 , § 6, 1983 Tex. Gen. L aws 5311, 5317, amende d by Act of Apr. 16, 1985, 69th L eg ., ch. 44, § 1, 1985 Tex. Gen. L aws 434, amende d by Act of May 27, 1991, 72d L eg ., ch. 652, § 13, 1991 Tex. Gen. L aws 2397 (cur rent version at Tex. Penal Code § 19.03). See Act of May 23, 1973, 63d L eg ., ch. 399, § 1, 1973 Tex. Gen. L aws 883, 913, amende d 2 by Act of May 28, 1973, 63d L eg ., ch. 426, art. 2, § 1, 1973 Tex. Ge n L aw s 1 1 2 2, 1123 (cur rent version at Te x . Penal Code § 19.02).DISCUSSIO N

Untim ely Notice

This C o u rt ’s appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a timely filed notice of appea l. See State v. Ri ewe , 13 S.W .3d 408, 410 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000); Olivo v. State , 918 S.W .2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Rule 26.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedur e provides that an appea l is perf ecte d in a criminal case when notice of appea l is filed within 30 day s afte r the day sentenc e is imposed or suspended in open court unless a motion for new trial is timely filed. Tex. R. App. P. 2 6

. 2 (a )(1). Absent a timely filed notice of appea l, we do not obtain jurisdiction to addre ss the merits of the appea l in a criminal case and can take no ac tion other than to dismiss the appea l for want of jurisdiction. See Slaton v. State , 981 S.W .2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). I n this case , the trial court imposed sentenc e on October 14, 1993. Wil liams filed his pro se reque st for an appea l on September 3, 2013—almost 20 y ear s afte r sentenc e was imp osed. Thus, his notice of appea l is untimely and does not ope rate to g ive us jurisdiction ove r this a ppeal. See Castillo v. State , 369 S.W .3d 196, 202 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012). No Right to Appeal Fur thermore , the cler

k ’ s r e c o r d in th is a

p peal contains a trial court cer tification signe d by the district court j u d ge o n S ep t em ber 9, 2013. The trial court has cer tified that (1) this is a plea- barg ain case and Wil liams has no rig ht of appea l, and (2) Wil liams waived the rig ht of appea l. 3

We also note that the j u d gm en t of conviction ref lects the terms of the plea barg ain as 3 “De fenda nt to rec ei v e li f

e [i n th e ] T e xa s Depa

rtment Criminal J ustice I nstitut ional Division and shall not appea l.” 2We are require d to dismiss an appea l “if a cer tification that shows the defe ndant has a rig ht of appea l has not been made part of the rec ord.” See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); Dears v. State , 154 S.W .3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Out-of-Time Appeal

To the extent Wil liams asks this Court to g rant him an o u t -of-time appea l, that

reme dy is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. His recourse , if any , is by way of post-convic tion writ of habea s corpus returna ble to the Texas Court of Criminal Appea ls. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, §§ 3(a) , 5; Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals , 802 S.W .2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (“We are the on ly c o u

r t w it h jurisdiction in final post-conviction felony proce eding s.”); Parr v. State , 206 S.W .3d 143, 145 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006, no pet.) (“[T]he Court of Criminal Appea ls

. . . has the ex clusive authority to g rant post-felony conviction relief, s uch as an out-of -t i me appeal, i f t he defe ndant is then confine d as a r esult of that final fe lony conviction.”)

. CONCLUSION Wil liams’s notice of appea l, filed near ly 20 y ear s afte r his sentenc e was imposed, is untimely

. Thus, this Court lacks jurisdiction to enterta in an appe al. Moreove r, the re cord r efle cts that this was a plea- barg ain case and Wil liams has no rig ht of appea l. For these rea sons, we dismiss Wil liams’s attempted appe al for la ck of jurisdiction. SeeTex. R. App. P . 43.2(f)

.

3__________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Jus tice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Rose, and Goodwin Dismissed for Want of J urisdiction Filed: Oc tober 11, 2013 Do Not Publish

4