Christopher Dillard v. the State of Texas

CourtTexas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)
DecidedMay 13, 2026
Docket04-25-00747-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Christopher Dillard v. the State of Texas (Christopher Dillard v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Christopher Dillard v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-25-00747-CR

Christopher DILLARD, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 38th Judicial District Court, Real County, Texas Trial Court No. 2021-1421-DR Honorable Kelley Kimble, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Lori Massey Brissette, Justice Adrian A. Spears II, Justice H. Todd McCray, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 13, 2026

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Appellant attempts to appeal from his conviction for sexual assault of a child under Texas

Penal Code Section 22.011(a)(2). “A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke” appellate

jurisdiction. Taylor v. State, 424 S.W.3d 39, 43 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). “A defendant’s notice of

appeal is timely if filed within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended, or within

ninety days after sentencing if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial.” Id. (citing TEX.

R. APP. P. 26.2(a)). 04-25-00747-CR

The trial court imposed the sentence on August 7, 2025. Because appellant did not file a

motion for new trial, his notice of appeal was due by September 8, 2025. See TEX. R. APP. P.

26.2(a)(1). The record reflects appellant filed his notice of appeal on November 5, 2025, making

this appeal untimely. Because it appears we lack jurisdiction over this appeal, we ordered appellant

to show cause on or before April 15, 2026 why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of

jurisdiction. In response, appellant filed a letter acknowledging that he did not file a motion for

new trial in this case and stating that appellant “does not contest the jurisdictional issue[.]” We

therefore dismiss this untimely appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Taylor, 424 S.W.3d at 43.

DO NOT PUBLISH

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Christopher Dillard v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-dillard-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp4-2026.