Court Opinion

ID: 2925791
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 21:27:09.567906+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:42.413306
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-07-00683-CR

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
______________________________________________________________

ARLEN RAY TENBERG,                                                        APPELLANT,

                                            v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                APPELLEE.
_____________________________________________________________

               On Appeal from the 24th District Court
                    of De Witt County, Texas.
______________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

                   Before Justices Yañez, Rodriguez, and Vela
                       Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

      Appellant, Arlen Ray Tenberg, attempted to perfect an appeal from a conviction for

intoxication assault. 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 April 20, 2006. Appellant filed his

notice of appeal on October 18, 2007. On November 2, 2007, 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 has not filed a response to the Court’s

directive.

       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. 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. 26.3.

       Appellant’s notice of appeal, filed more than seventeen 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 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 .

                                             2
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).

Memorandum Opinion delivered
and filed this the 20th day of March, 2008.

                                              3