Roland Herrera v. State of Texas ( 2000 )

Nos. 04-00-00701-CR & 04-00-00702-CR

Roland HERRERA, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 1999-CR-3797 & 1999-CR-3798 Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Alma L. López, Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Delivered and Filed: December 13, 2000

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

Pursuant to plea agreements, the appellant, Roland Herrera, pled "guilty" to indictments charging him with the offenses of possession of a controlled substance, four grams or more but less than 200 grams in Cause No. 1999CR3797, and 200 grams or more but less than 400 grams in Cause No. 1999CR3798. ⁽¹⁾ Herrera's plea agreements capped punishment at 12 years confinement, and took into consideration Cause Nos. 99CR2834 and CC720158. The trial judge accepted Herrera's plea, adjudicated him guilty, and sentenced Herrera to twelve years in prison. Herrera's sentence was imposed on January 3, 2000.

On February 1, 2000, Herrera filed pro se motions for new trials. Because he filed motions for new trials on February 1, 2000, Herrera's notices of appeal were due to be filed by April 3, 2000. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1). Motions for extension of time to file the notices of appeal were due on April 18, 2000, but Herrera did not file motions for extension of time. Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Instead, Herrera filed notices of appeal in the trial court on October 10, 2000.

Our initial review of the records in these appeals indicated that we did not have jurisdiction because the notices of appeal were late, so we ordered Herrera to show cause in writing why the appeals should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In response, Herrera's appellate attorney filed responses stating that she had not received notification of her appointment until October 17, 2000, and did not realize at that time that notices of appeal had not been filed earlier. The appellate attorney concluded by asking us to retain these causes on this court's docket. We are unable to do so.

To invoke this court's jurisdiction for an appeal from a criminal conviction, an appellant must follow the requisites for perfection of an appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2. The rules of appellate procedure require an appellant to perfect an appeal by filing a notice of appeal within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court. See id. R. 26.2. Herrera, however, did not file his notices of appeal until October 10, 2000, six months after the deadline for filing the notices of appeal. Because we have no jurisdiction over these appeals, the appeals are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. ⁽²⁾

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

1. The judgment in Cause No. 1999CR3797 is the subject of Appeal No. 04-00-00701-CR; the judgment in Cause No. 1999CR3798 is the subject of Appeal No. 04-00-00702-CR.

2. Although the attorney's response is not a basis for establishing jurisdiction, those reasons could possibly serve as the basis for obtaining an out-of-time appeal under article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.