Christopher Michael Schubert v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Christopher Michael Schubert v. State

DecidedAugust 10, 2000

Docket13-00-00476-CR

StatusPublished

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

Bluebook

Christopher Michael Schubert v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-00-476-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

__________________________________________________________________

CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL SCHUBERT

, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

__________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 366^th District Court of Collin County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Chief Justice Seerden and Justices Dorsey and Rodriguez

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL SCHUBERT, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 366^TH District Court of Collin County, Texas. Sentence in this cause was imposed on May 4, 2000. No timely motion for new trial was filed. The notice of appeal was due to be filed on June 5,2000, but was not filed until July 14, 2000. Said notice of appeal is untimely filed. Appellant filed an untimely motion to permit late filing of the notice of appeal on July 26, 2000.

Tex. R. App. P. 26.3 provides that the court of appeals may grant an extension of time for filing notice of appeal if such notice is filed within fifteen days of the last day allowed and within the same period a motion is filed in the court of appeals reasonably explaining the need for such extension. Appellant failed to file his notice of appeal and motion requesting an extension of time within such period.

The Court, having considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant's untimely motion, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant's untimely motion to permit late filing of notice of appeal is dismissed. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed this

the 10^th day of August, 2000.

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

NUMBER 13-00-476-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

__________________________________________________________________

CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL SCHUBERT

, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

__________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 366^th District Court of Collin County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Chief Justice Seerden and Justices Dorsey and Rodriguez

Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL SCHUBERT, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 366^TH District Court of Collin County, Texas. Sentence in this cause was imposed on May 4, 2000. No timely motion for new trial was filed. The notice of appeal was due to be filed on June 5,2000, but was not filed until July 14, 2000. Said notice of appeal is untimely filed. Appellant filed an untimely motion to permit late filing of the notice of appeal on July 26, 2000.

Tex. R. App. P. 26.3 provides that the court of appeals may grant an extension of time for filing notice of appeal if such notice is filed within fifteen days of the last day allowed and within the same period a motion is filed in the court of appeals reasonably explaining the need for such extension. Appellant failed to file his notice of appeal and motion requesting an extension of time within such period.

The Court, having considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant's untimely motion, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant's untimely motion to permit late filing of notice of appeal is dismissed. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed this

the 10^th day of August, 2000.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Christopher Michael Schubert v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-michael-schubert-v-state-texapp-2000.