Opinion
No. 11-20-00150-CR No. 11-20-00151-CR
07-16-2020
MICHAEL DAVID WHITE, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 91st District Court Eastland County, Texas
Trial Court Cause Nos. 24935 & 25016
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Michael David White has filed an untimely pro se notice of appeal from a judgment of conviction for the offense of possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver and from a judgment of conviction for the offense of bail jumping and failure to appear. Appellant pleaded true to the enhancement allegations, and the trial court assessed punishment for each offense at confinement for twenty-five years—to be served concurrently. We dismiss the appeals.
The documents on file in these appeals indicate that Appellant's sentences were imposed on September 19, 2018, and that his notices of appeal were filed in the district clerk's office on March 30, 2020. When the appeals were filed in this court, we notified Appellant by letter that the notices of appeal appeared to be untimely and that the appeals may be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. We requested that Appellant respond to our letter and show grounds to continue. Appellant has filed a response, but he has not shown grounds upon which these appeals may continue.
Pursuant to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, a notice of appeal is due to be filed either (1) within thirty days after the date that sentence is imposed in open court or (2) if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial, within ninety days after the date that sentence is imposed in open court. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a). A notice of appeal must be in writing and filed with the clerk of the trial court. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(c)(1). The documents on file in this court reflect that Appellant's notices of appeal were filed with the clerk of the trial court 558 days after the sentences were imposed. The notices of appeal were therefore untimely.
Absent a timely filed notice of appeal or the granting of a timely motion for extension of time, we do not have jurisdiction to entertain these appeals. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522-23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Rodarte v. State, 860 S.W.2d 108, 110 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). Moreover, the trial court's certification reflects that these are plea-bargain cases and that Appellant has no right of appeal. Thus, even if Appellant had timely perfected an appeal, these appeals would have been prohibited by Rule 25.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, which provides that an appellate court must dismiss an appeal without further action when there is no certification showing that the defendant has the right of appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); Chavez v. State, 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); see Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613-14 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
These appeals are dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM July 16, 2020 Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Panel consists of: Stretcher, J.,
Wright, S.C.J., and Judge Trotter. Bailey, C.J., and Willson, J., not participating.
Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, sitting by assignment.
The Honorable W. Stacy Trotter, 358th District Court, Ector County, Texas, sitting by assignment.