George Myrick v. State ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                                           NO. 12-05-00336-CR

     

                  IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

     

    TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

     

                                 TYLER, TEXAS

     

     

    GEORGE MYRICK,                                         §     APPEAL FROM THE 114TH

    APPELLANT

     

    V.                                                                         §     JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

     

    THE STATE OF TEXAS,

    APPELLEE                                                       §     SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

     

      

      

                                                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                                                     PER CURIAM

    This appeal is being dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  Appellant was convicted of the offense of possession of a controlled substance, and punishment was imposed on July 25, 2005.  Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.2 provides that an appeal is perfected when notice of appeal is filed within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court unless a motion for new trial is timely filed.  Where a timely motion for new trial has been filed, notice of appeal shall be filed within ninety days after the sentence is imposed or suspended in open court.  Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(2).  Appellant did not file a motion for new trial.  Therefore, his notice of appeal was due not later than August 24, 2005. Appellant did not file his notice of appeal until October 14, 2005.  Moreover, Appellant did not file a timely motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal as authorized by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.3. 


    On October 19, 2005, this Court notified Appellant, pursuant to appellate rules 26.2 and 37.2, that the clerk’s record did not show the jurisdiction of this Court, and it gave him until November 3, 2005 to correct the defect.  Appellant has neither responded to our October 19 notice or otherwise demonstrated the jurisdiction of this Court.  Because this Court has no authority to allow the late filing of a notice of appeal except as provided by Rule 26.3, the appeal must be dismissed.  See Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). 

    The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 

    Opinion delivered November 16, 2005.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

                                                                 (DO NOT PUBLISH)

     

    [COMMENT1] 


     

     

     

     

                                                    COURT OF APPEALS

                         TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                                                                 JUDGMENT

     

                                                              NOVEMBER 16, 2005

     

                                                             NO. 12-05-00336-CR

     

                                                                 GEORGE MYRICK,

                                                                          Appellant

                                                                                V.

                                                            THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                                                                          Appellee

    _____________________________________________________________________________

                                             Appeal from the 114th Judicial District Court

                                         of Smith County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 114-0193-05)

    _____________________________________________________________________________

     

     

    THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the transcript of the record; and the same being inspected, it is the opinion of this Court that it is without jurisdiction of the appeal, and that the appeal should be dismissed.

    It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by the court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction, and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.

    By per curiam opinion.

    Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and DeVasto, J.


                                       THE STATE OF TEXAS

                              M A N D A T E

                                     *********************************************

     

     

    TO THE 114TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF SMITH COUNTY, GREETINGS:

     

    Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 16th day of November, 2005, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

     

                                                        GEORGE MYRICK, Appellant

     

                                        NO. 12-05-00336-CR; Trial Court No. 114-0193-05

     

                                                                By per curiam opinion.

     

                                                     THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

     

    was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

     

    THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the transcript of the record; and the same being inspected, it is the opinion of this Court that it is without jurisdiction of the appeal, and that the appeal should be dismissed.

     

    It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by the court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction, and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.

     

    WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

     

    WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Tyler, this the ______ day of __________________, 200____.

     

     
    CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

     

     

    By:_______________________________

         Deputy Clerk

     


      

     [COMMENT1]J.11         DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION - Vanilla

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-05-00336-CR

Filed Date: 11/16/2005

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/10/2015