Case Name: Francisco Javier CASAS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 2000-11-22
Citations: 33 S.W.3d 874
Docket Number: No. 10-00-234-CR
Parties: Francisco Javier CASAS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Judges: Before Chief Justice DAVIS, Justice VANCE, and Justice GRAY.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 33
Pages: 874–875

Head Matter:
Francisco Javier CASAS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 10-00-234-CR.
Court of Appeals of Texas, Waco.
Nov. 22, 2000.
Rehearing Overruled Jan. 3, 2001.
Kenneth W. Smith, Houston, for appellant.
John B. Holmes, Jr., Harris County Dist. Atty., Houston, for appellee.
Before Chief Justice DAVIS, Justice VANCE, and Justice GRAY.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DAVIS, Chief Justice.
Francisco Javier Casas pleaded nolo contendere to sexual assault of a child, and, pursuant to a plea agreement, the court deferred an adjudication of guilt and placed him on community supervision for eight years. After a contested hearing, the court adjudicated Casas's guilt and sentenced him to ten years' imprisonment. Casas filed a general notice of appeal.
An appellant who has pleaded nolo contendere in exchange for deferred adjudication must comply with appellate rule 25.2(b)(3) when he seeks to appeal a subsequent adjudication and sentencing. See Craddock v. State, 32 S.W.3d 886, 887 (Tex.App.—Waco 2000, no pet. h.); see also Manuel v. State, 994 S.W.2d 658, 662 (Tex.Crim.App.1999); Watson v. State, 924 S.W.2d 711, 714-15 (Tex.Crim.App.1996) (both applying former appellate rule 40(b)(1)). Casas's general notice of appeal does not comply with this rule.
Because Casas's notice of appeal does not comply with rule 25.2(b)(3), we do not have jurisdiction over this appeal. See Craddock, 32 S.W.3d at 887; Okigbo v. State, 960 S.W.2d 923, 925 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1998, pet. ref'd). The time for perfecting his appeal has elapsed, so this defect cannot be corrected. See State v. Riewe, 18 S.W.3d 408, 413-14 (Tex.Crim.App.2000); Craddock, 32 S.W.3d at 888. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Justice, VANCE concurring.