David Cleo Richard v. State
This text of David Cleo Richard v. State (David Cleo Richard 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.
Opinion
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
____________
NO. 01-09-00559-CR
DAVID CLEO RICHARD, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 262nd District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 498478
MEMORANDUM OPINION
We lack jurisdiction to hear this appeal. The trial court sentenced appellant, David Cleo Richard, and signed a final judgment in this case on June 29, 1988. Appellant did not file a motion for new trial, and therefore the deadline for filing notice of appeal was July 29, 1988, 30 days after sentencing. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1).
On June 9, 2009, a date 7,650 days after the deadline for filing a notice of appeal, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. An untimely notice of appeal fails to vest the appellate court with jurisdiction to hear the case. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 209-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Douglas v. State, 987 S.W.2d 605, 605-06 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.). Because appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely filed, we lack jurisdiction to hear this appeal.
Even if we were to construe appellant’s notice of appeal filed on June 9, 2009, as a motion for an out-of-time appeal, neither the trial court nor this Court has authority to grant an out-of-time appeal. The exclusive post-conviction remedy in final felony convictions in Texas courts is through a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.07 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon Supp. 2008).
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
We dismiss as moot any pending motions.
It is so ORDERED.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Hanks, and Bland.
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
David Cleo Richard v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-cleo-richard-v-state-texapp-2009.