Court Opinion

ID: 9403071
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-20 13:09:32.791647+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:04.188739
License: Public Domain

Fourth Court of Appeals
                                     San Antonio, Texas
                                 MEMORANDUM OPINION
                                         No. 04-23-00477-CR

                                         Detrick DEROVEN,
                                               Appellant

                                                  v.

                                        The STATE of Texas,
                                              Appellee

                     From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
                                  Trial Court No. 1996-CR-3437A
                           Honorable Kristina Escalona, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting:          Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
                  Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
                  Irene Rios, Justice

Delivered and Filed: June 14, 2023

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

           In trial court cause number 1996-CR-3437A, Appellant was tried by a jury and found guilty

of capital murder—multiple persons. On November 20, 1997, the trial court sentenced Appellant

to confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice—Institutional Division for life.

           On January 18, 2022, Appellant filed a motion for forensic DNA testing of evidence. See

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 64.01(a-1). The State filed its response, and the trial court

denied the motion on March 16, 2022. An appeal from the decision on a motion for forensic DNA

testing “is to a court of appeals in the same manner as an appeal of any other criminal matter.” Id.
                                                                                     04-23-00477-CR

art. 64.05; see Gutierrez v. State, 307 S.W.3d 318, 321 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (“[A]n order

denying DNA testing is an ‘appealable order’ under Rule 25.2(a)(2).”).

       Appellant’s notice of appeal was due on April 18, 2022. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a); Olivo

v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). More than one year later, on April 27,

2023, Appellant filed a pro se motion for leave to file a late notice of appeal of the denial of his

motion for post-conviction DNA testing.

       A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke a court of appeals’ jurisdiction. Olivo v.

State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); see Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802

S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (stating that an out-of-time appeal from a final felony

conviction may be sought by filing a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.07 of the Texas

Code of Criminal Procedure); In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 692 (Tex. App.—San Antonio

1998, orig. proceeding) (citing TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 3) (“Post-conviction

writs of habeas corpus are to be filed in the trial court in which the conviction was obtained [and]

made returnable to the Court of Criminal Appeals.”).

       On May 10, 2023, we ordered Appellant to show cause in writing by May 31, 2023, why

this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522; Ater,

802 S.W.2d at 243.

       On May 30, 2023, Appellant, acting pro se, filed an Inmate Declaration of Indigence, a

motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and a docketing statement. These documents do not show

how Appellant’s notice of appeal was timely or otherwise demonstrate how this court’s jurisdiction

has been invoked. See Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522.

       Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

                                                  PER CURIAM

Do not publish

                                                -2-