Desmond Dajuan Sanders, Jr. v. the State of Texas

Opinion

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

No. 02-23-00126-CR ___________________________

DESMOND DAJUAN SANDERS, JR., Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the 90th District Court Young County, Texas Trial Court No. CR11766

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

Appellant Desmond Dajuan Sanders, Jr. attempts to appeal a judgment

adjudicating his guilt following his unsuccessful stint on deferred adjudication

community supervision. But his notice of appeal was untimely; the notice was due

“within 30 days after the day sentence [wa]s imposed . . . in open court,”1 Tex. R.

App. P. 26.2(a)(1), and it was not filed until the thirty-first day—one day too late. See

Tex. R. App. P. 4.1(a).

“A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke a court of appeals’s

jurisdiction,” Taylor v. State, 424 S.W.3d 39, 43 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); see Tex. R.

App. P. 25.2(b), so we notified Appellant of our concern that his untimely notice

deprived us of jurisdiction. We warned him that we could dismiss the appeal for want

of jurisdiction unless, within ten days, he provided evidence that his notice of appeal

had been timely filed,2 or he showed other grounds for continuing the appeal. See

Tex. R. App. P. 44.3. More than ten days have passed, but we have not received a

response.

1 Appellant has not provided any indication that he filed a motion for new trial. Cf. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(2). 2 We noted that our record showed no motion for new trial, and we asked him to provide evidence that he had placed his notice of appeal in the mail on or before the deadline. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(b); Taylor, 424 S.W.3d at 43–44 (discussing mailbox rule in Rule 9.2). Even this was a stretch, though, as Appellant’s notice of appeal appears to have been electronically filed by his counsel.

2 Because Appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely, we dismiss his appeal for

want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); Walker v. State, Nos. 02-22-00114-

CR, 02-22-00115-CR, 2022 WL 4272865, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Sept. 15,

2022, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

/s/ Bonnie Sudderth

Bonnie Sudderth Chief Justice

Do Not Publish Tex.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

Delivered: July 6, 2023