Opinion
06-24-00149-CR
11-18-2024
JAMARRION FREEMAN, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
Do Not Publish
Submitted: November 15, 2024
On Appeal from the 202nd District Court Bowie County, Texas Trial Court No. 23F0918-202
Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Scott E. Stevens Chief Justice
On September 19, 2023, Jamarrion Freeman pled guilty to the offense of credit card or debit card abuse. The trial court deferred a finding of guilt and placed Freeman on deferred adjudication community supervision for three years. On June 10, 2024, the State filed a motion to proceed with adjudication, alleging, among other things, that Freeman had committed a new offense. On July 11, 2024, the trial court adjudicated Freeman's guilt and sentenced him to two years' confinement in a state jail facility.
Under Rule 21.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Freeman would have had to file a motion for new trial, to be timely, on or before August 12, 2024. See TEX. R. APP. P. 21.4. Freeman did not file his motion for new trial until September 17, 2024; as a result, he failed to extend the period for perfecting his appeal, and his notice of appeal, to be timely, was also due on or before August 12, 2024. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2. Freeman did not file his notice of appeal until September 17, 2024, well beyond the August 12 deadline. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has expressly held that, without a timely filed notice of appeal, we cannot exercise jurisdiction over an appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); see Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 209 n.3 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (per curiam).
On October 16, 2024, we informed Freeman of the apparent defect in our jurisdiction over his appeal and afforded him the opportunity to respond and, if possible, cure such defect. We informed Freeman that, if he did not respond by October 28, 2024, we would have no choice but to dismiss his appeal for want of jurisdiction. Freeman did not file a response to our jurisdictional defect letter, though he did file an untimely motion for an extension of the deadline to file his notice of appeal, which we deny.
Because Freeman did not timely perfect his appeal, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.