Opinion
No. 14-09-00217-CR
Opinion filed March 19, 2009. DO NOT PUBLISH — TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
On Appeal from the 232nd District Court, Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 693299.
Panel consists of Chief Justice HEDGES and Justices ANDERSON and SEYMORE.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 1996, appellant was convicted by a jury of possession with intent to deliver between four and 200 grams of cocaine. The trial court assessed his punishment at confinement in prison for forty-five years, enhanced by two prior felony convictions. This Court affirmed appellant's conviction. See Smith v. State, No. 14-96-01392-CR (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 31, 1999, pet. ref'd). On March 3, 2009, appellant filed a notice of appeal attempting to appeal from the trial court's denial of his motion entitled "Request for Ruling on the Motion for New Trial on Material Evidence and Keeter Test Hearings, with Subpoena." The trial court's order was dated January 13, 2009, more than thirty days before appellant's notice of appeal was filed. A defendant's notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after an appealable order is entered. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of Rule 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998). If an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal. Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. Id. Appellant's notice of appeal is untimely to appeal from a January 13, 2009, order. In addition, an appellate court generally has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant only if there has been a final judgment of conviction. Workman v. State, 170 Tex. Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). Exceptions to the requirement include: (1) certain appeals while on deferred adjudication community supervision, Kirk v. State, 942 S.W.2d 624, 625 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997); (2) appeals from the denial of a motion to reduce bond, TEX. R. APP. P. 31.1; McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161; and (3) certain appeals from the denial of habeas corpus relief, Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. The denial of a motion such as that filed by appellant does not fall within the exceptions to our jurisdictional constraint to consider only appeals from final judgments of conviction, and therefore, it is not a separately appealable order. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.