Court Opinion

ID: 9407715
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-08 06:09:54.98151+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:39.859597
License: Public Domain

Opinion filed July 7, 2023

                                       In The

        Eleventh Court of Appeals
                                    ___________

                               No. 11-23-00129-CR
                                    ___________

                     LANNY MARVIN BUSH, Appellant
                                          V.
                      THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                      On Appeal from the 42nd District Court
                             Coleman County, Texas
                         Trial Court Cause No. CR02602

                      MEMORANDUM OPINION
       Appellant, Lanny Marvin Bush, has filed an untimely notice of appeal in this
cause. Appellant attempts to appeal from an order denying his motion for forensic
DNA testing. We dismiss the appeal.
       The documents on file in this case indicate that the trial court signed its order
on March 24, 2023, and that the notice of appeal was filed in the district clerk’s
office on May 30, 2023. Appellant’s notice of appeal was due to be filed within
thirty days after the date that the trial court signed its order.         See TEX. R.
APP. P. 26.2(a)(1); see also TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 64.05 (West 2018). 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 court show that Appellant’s notice
of appeal was filed sixty-eight days after the trial court’s order was signed. 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. See Swearingen v. State, 189 S.W.3d 779, 781 (Tex. Crim.
App. 2006); see also 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 by letter that
the notice of appeal appeared to be untimely and that the appeal may be dismissed
for want of jurisdiction. We requested that Appellant respond to our letter and show
grounds to continue. Appellant filed a response and a “motion to proceed” but has
not shown any grounds upon which this appeal may proceed. Because we lack
jurisdiction over his appeal, we have no jurisdiction to consider his motion to
proceed. See Gowan v. State, No. 02-16-00140-CR, 2016 WL 2989952, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Fort Worth May 19, 2016, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for
publication).
      We dismiss Appellant’s motion and this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

                                               W. STACY TROTTER
                                               JUSTICE
July 7, 2023

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Trotter, J., and Williams, J.
                                           2