Deandre P. Jones v. Major Devery W. Mooneyham, Sgt. Kevin L. Carlvin, Sherri L. Milligan and Karen J. Norman

Court of Appeals of Texas

Deandre P. Jones v. Major Devery W. Mooneyham, Sgt. Kevin L. Carlvin, Sherri L. Milligan and Karen J. Norman

DecidedOctober 11, 2006

Docket12-06-00342-CV

StatusPublished

This text of Deandre P. Jones v. Major Devery W. Mooneyham, Sgt. Kevin L. Carlvin, Sherri L. Milligan and Karen J. Norman (Deandre P. Jones v. Major Devery W. Mooneyham, Sgt. Kevin L. Carlvin, Sherri L. Milligan and Karen J. Norman) 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

Deandre P. Jones v. Major Devery W. Mooneyham, Sgt. Kevin L. Carlvin, Sherri L. Milligan and Karen J. Norman, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

MARY'S OPINION HEADING

NO. 12-06-00342-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

DEANDRE P. JONES, § APPEAL FROM THE 87TH

APPELLANT

V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

MAJOR DEVERY W. MOONEYHAM,

SGT. KEVIN L. CARLVIN, SHERRI L. § ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

MILLIGAN AND KAREN J. NORMAN,

APPELLEES

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed for want of jurisdiction pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(a). The trial court’s judgment was signed on August 17, 2006. Under rule of appellate procedure 26.1(a), unless Appellant timely filed a motion for new trial or other postjudgment motion that extended the appellate deadlines, his notice of appeal was due to have been filed “within 30 days after the judgment [was] signed,” i.e., September 18, 2006. Appellant did not file a motion for new trial or other postjudgment motion that extended the appellate deadlines. Moreover, Appellant did not file a motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Consequently, the time for perfecting Appellant’s appeal was not extended. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a). Appellant filed his notice of appeal on September 28, 2006. Because the notice of appeal was not filed on or before September 18, 2006, this Court has no jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

On September 28, 2006, this Court notified Appellant pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(a) that his notice of appeal was untimely. Appellant was further informed that unless the record was amended on or before October 9, 2006 to establish the jurisdiction of this Court, the appeal would be dismissed. In his response to our October 9, 2006 notice, Appellant filed an amended notice of appeal. However, the amended notice of appeal does not cure the jurisdictional defect created by Appellant’s untimely filed notice of appeal.

Because this Court is not authorized to extend the time for perfecting an appeal except as provided by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and 26.3, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

Opinion delivered October 11, 2006.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)

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

MARY'S OPINION HEADING

NO. 12-06-00342-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

DEANDRE P. JONES, § APPEAL FROM THE 87TH

APPELLANT

V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

MAJOR DEVERY W. MOONEYHAM,

SGT. KEVIN L. CARLVIN, SHERRI L. § ANDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

MILLIGAN AND KAREN J. NORMAN,

APPELLEES

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed for want of jurisdiction pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(a). The trial court’s judgment was signed on August 17, 2006. Under rule of appellate procedure 26.1(a), unless Appellant timely filed a motion for new trial or other postjudgment motion that extended the appellate deadlines, his notice of appeal was due to have been filed “within 30 days after the judgment [was] signed,” i.e., September 18, 2006. Appellant did not file a motion for new trial or other postjudgment motion that extended the appellate deadlines. Moreover, Appellant did not file a motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Consequently, the time for perfecting Appellant’s appeal was not extended. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a). Appellant filed his notice of appeal on September 28, 2006. Because the notice of appeal was not filed on or before September 18, 2006, this Court has no jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

On September 28, 2006, this Court notified Appellant pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(a) that his notice of appeal was untimely. Appellant was further informed that unless the record was amended on or before October 9, 2006 to establish the jurisdiction of this Court, the appeal would be dismissed. In his response to our October 9, 2006 notice, Appellant filed an amended notice of appeal. However, the amended notice of appeal does not cure the jurisdictional defect created by Appellant’s untimely filed notice of appeal.

Because this Court is not authorized to extend the time for perfecting an appeal except as provided by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and 26.3, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

Opinion delivered October 11, 2006.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Deandre P. Jones v. Major Devery W. Mooneyham, Sgt. Kevin L. Carlvin, Sherri L. Milligan and Karen J. Norman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deandre-p-jones-v-major-devery-w-mooneyham-sgt-kev-texapp-2006.