Geovany Humberto Lopez v. State ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • DISMISS; and Opinion Filed September 29, 2014.
    S   In The
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    No. 05-14-01174-CR
    GEOVANY HUMBERTO LOPEZ, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court
    Dallas County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. F06-45178-W
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Before Justices FitzGerald, Fillmore, and Stoddart
    Opinion by Justice Fillmore
    Geovany Humberto Lopez was convicted of intoxication assault, see TEX. PENAL CODE
    ANN. § 49.07 (West 2011), and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment. Sentence was imposed in
    open court on July 15, 2014. No motion for new trial was filed; therefore, appellant’s notice of
    appeal was due by August 14, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). Appellant’s notice of
    appeal is hand-dated August 28, 2014 and file-stamped September 11, 2014. Even though the
    handwritten date is within the fifteen-day extension period provided by rule 26.3, nothing
    reflects the notice of appeal was mailed, or delivered to prison authorities for mailing, on or
    before August 29, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.2(b), 26.3(a); Campbell v. State, 
    320 S.W.3d 338
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (pro se “prisoner mailbox rule”). Moreover, appellant did not file an
    extension motion in this Court by August 29, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3(b); Slaton v. State,
    
    981 S.W.2d 208
    , 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (per curiam) (notice of appeal compliant with
    requirements of rule 26 essential to vest court of appeals with jurisdiction); Olivo v. State, 
    918 S.W.2d 519
    , 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (court of appeals may grant extension of time to file
    notice of appeal if notice is filed within fifteen days after last day allowed and, within same
    period, a motion is filed in court of appeals reasonably explaining need for extension of time).
    Therefore, we asked the parties to file letter briefs addressing our jurisdiction over the appeal.
    Appellant’s counsel filed a letter brief confirming that the notice of appeal is untimely and
    stating appellant does not desire to pursue the appeal.
    We agree the notice of appeal is untimely, leaving us without jurisdiction over the appeal.
    We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
    /Robert M. Fillmore/
    ROBERT M. FILLMORE
    JUSTICE
    Do Not Publish
    TEX. R. APP. P. 47
    141174F.U05
    –2–
    S
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    JUDGMENT
    GEOVANY HUMBERTO LOPEZ,                              On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District
    Appellant                                            Court, Dallas County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. F06-45178-W.
    No. 05-14-01174-CR        V.                         Opinion delivered by Justice Fillmore,
    Justices FitzGerald and Stoddart
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee                         participating.
    Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal for want of
    jurisdiction.
    Judgment entered this 29th day of September, 2014.
    –3–
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-14-01174-CR

Filed Date: 9/29/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/15/2015