Edward Lee Anzaldua v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 18, 2006
Docket13-06-00156-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Edward Lee Anzaldua v. State (Edward Lee Anzaldua 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
Edward Lee Anzaldua v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-06-156-CR

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________

EDWARD LEE ANZALDUA,                                         Appellant,

                                           v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                              Appellee.

                   On appeal from the 94th District Court

                           of Nueces County, Texas.

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and Garza

                       Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam


Appellant, EDWARD LEE ANZALDUA, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 94th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.  Sentence in this cause was imposed on November 25, 1996.  No timely motion for new trial was filed.   The notice of appeal was due to be filed on December 27, 1996, but was not filed until March 20, 2006.   Said notice of appeal is untimely filed.

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 a motion requesting an extension of time within such period.

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

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 18th day of May, 2006.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Edward Lee Anzaldua v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edward-lee-anzaldua-v-state-texapp-2006.