Cameron Marquette Lewis v. the State of Texas

• Court: Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)
• Decided: January 15, 2026
• Docket: 02-25-00454-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-25-00454-CR ___________________________

CAMERON MARQUETTE LEWIS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from County Criminal Court No. 9 Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1844584

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Cameron Marquette Lewis, acting pro se, attempts to appeal his

conviction for driving while intoxicated. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 49.04.

Pursuant to a plea bargain, Lewis’s sentence was imposed on May 16, 2025. He

did not file a motion for new trial, making his notice of appeal due by June 16, 2025.

See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a) (requiring that a notice of appeal be filed within 30 days

after the sentence is imposed or 90 days after the sentence is imposed if the defendant

files a motion for new trial). However, Lewis did not file his notice of appeal until

December 2, 2025, making it untimely. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1).

On December 3, 2025, we notified Lewis by letter of our concern that we lack

jurisdiction over this appeal because his notice of appeal was untimely. We informed

him that unless he filed a response by December 15, 2025, showing grounds for

continuing the appeal, the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See

Tex. R. App. P. 44.3. In response, Lewis filed a motion for extension, see Tex. R.

App. P. 26.3 (permitting an appellate court to extend the time to file a notice of

appeal if, within 15 days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal, the party files the

notice of appeal in the trial court and an extension motion in the appellate court), but

his extension motion was likewise untimely and did not cure the untimeliness of his

notice of appeal, see Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1).

Because Lewis’s appeal was untimely, and because a timely notice of appeal is

an essential component of our jurisdiction, we dismiss this appeal for want of

2 jurisdiction.1 See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a), 43.2(f); Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210

(Tex. Crim. App. 1998).

/s/ Brian Walker

Brian Walker Justice

Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: January 15, 2026

1 Even if Lewis’s notice of appeal had been timely, we still would not have jurisdiction over this appeal because he entered into a plea bargain with the State. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). The signed plea admonishments memorialize the plea bargain, and trial court’s certification states that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.”