Opinion
No. 11-16-00035-CV
02-18-2016
IN THE INTEREST OF S.L.B., A CHILD
On Appeal from the 29th District Court Palo Pinto County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. C46274
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an attempted appeal from an order in which the trial court terminated the parental rights of S.L.B.'s parents. An appeal in a parental termination case is an accelerated appeal. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405(a) (West 2014); TEX. R. APP. P. 28.4. The trial court signed the order of termination on December 17, 2015. Appellant, the father of the child, filed a notice of appeal on January 29, 2016. Because this is an accelerated appeal, Appellant's notice of appeal was due within twenty days after the order was signed, which would have made it due on January 6, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b). Even with the fifteen-day extension allowed by TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3, the time for filing the notice of appeal in this case had already expired when Appellant filed his notice of appeal. In a letter dated January 29, 2016, we informed Appellant that the notice of appeal appeared to be untimely. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b), 28.1(b). We requested that Appellant respond and show grounds to continue the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3.
In response to this court's letter, Appellant notified this court that he wanted to appeal and explained that he had missed court dates because he was in jail. However, we are without authority to extend the time period for the filing of Appellant's notice of appeal. Absent a timely notice of appeal, this court is without jurisdiction to consider an appeal. See Wilkins v. Methodist Health Care Sys., 160 S.W.3d 559, 564 (Tex. 2005); Garza v. Hibernia Nat'l Bank, 227 S.W.3d 233, 233-34 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, no pet.); see also Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 2, we are prohibited from suspending the Rules of Appellate Procedure "to alter the time for perfecting an appeal in a civil case." We dismiss this appeal in accordance with TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).
This appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM February 18, 2016 Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,
Willson, J., and Bailey, J.