Court Opinion

ID: 2742877
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-10-16 07:12:58.284573+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:37:33.948120
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-14-00542-CR

                           COURT OF APPEALS

                 THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ
AKA ALBERT RODRIGUEZ,                                                      Appellant,

                                           v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                 Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On appeal from the 105th District Court
                   of Nueces County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                        MEMORANDUM OPINION
      Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Longoria
                   Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

       Appellant, Alberto Rodriguez aka Albert Rodriguez, attempted to perfect an appeal

from a conviction for driving while intoxicated.   We dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction.
       This Court's appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a timely filed

notice of appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Absent

a timely filed notice of appeal, a court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to address the

merits of the appeal and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).

       The trial court imposed sentence in this matter on February 4, 2013. Appellant

filed a pro se notice of appeal (motion for out of time appeal) on September 23, 2013.

On September 22, 2014, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that the

appeal was not timely perfected and that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was

not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court’s directive. Appellant’s

appointed counsel has responded that appellant has not timely filed a notice of appeal.

       Unless a motion for new trial has been timely filed, a notice of appeal must be filed

within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or after

the day the trial court enters an appealable order. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). Where a

timely motion for new trial has been filed, the notice of appeal must be filed within ninety

days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court. See id. r. 26.2(a)(2).

The time within which to file the notice may be enlarged if, within fifteen days after the

deadline for filing the notice, the party files the notice of appeal and a motion complying

with Rule 10.5(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. r. 26.3.

       Appellant’s notice of appeal, filed more than seven months after sentence was

imposed, was untimely, and accordingly, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal.           See

Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210. Appellant may be entitled to an out-of-time appeal by filing

                                             2
a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals;

however, the availability of that remedy is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX.

CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 3(a) (Vernon 2005); see also Ex parte Garcia, 988

S.W.2d 240 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999).

      The appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

                                                PER CURIAM

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

Delivered and filed the
16th day of October, 2014.

                                            3