Ex Parte Ethan Frederick Hill v. the State of Texas

Opinion

Court of Appeals

Tenth Appellate District of Texas

10-26-00119-CR

Ex parte Ethan Frederick Hill

On appeal from the

440th District Court of Coryell County, Texas Judge Grant Kinsey, presiding Trial Court Cause No. DC-25-24345A

JUSTICE SMITH delivered the opinion of the Court.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On April 2, 2026, Appellant filed a motion to extend the time for filing a notice of appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 306a along with a notice of appeal from the trial court’s denial of his writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.072. The trial court’s order was signed on December 1, 2025.

The rules of civil procedure do not apply to the denial of a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.072, as the appeal of a writ is a criminal proceeding. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. arts. 11.072, §8; 44.02. Appellant argues that he did not receive notice of the entry of the trial court’s judgment until more than 90 days after the trial court’s judgment was signed and sought relief from the trial court pursuant to Rule 306a of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows appellate timetables to, in essence, be reset to the date when a party receives notice of the entry of an appealable judgment. See TEX. R. CIV. P. 306a. However, even if Appellant did not receive timely notice of the entry of the trial court’s judgment, there is no comparable rule in criminal appeals to Rule of Civil Procedure 306a. See Ex parte Tullett, No. 05-22-00845-CR, 2024 WL 357257, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 727 (Tex. App.—Dallas Jan. 31, 2024, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Peterson v. State, No. 14- 25-01110-CR, 2026 WL 806885, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 2612 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] Mar. 24, 2026, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Giddens v. State, No. 06-08-00196-CR, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 9896, 2008 WL 5627203, at *1 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Oct. 22, 2008, pet. ref'd) (mem. op., not designated for publication). Therefore, the notice of appeal was due within 30 days after the entry of the trial court’s judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1).

The notice of appeal of the trial court’s judgment was not filed within 30 days of the entry of the judgment on December 1, 2025, and thus, it was not timely filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). Accordingly, this Court does not

Ex parte Ethan Frederick Hill Page 2 have jurisdiction over this appeal and the appeal is dismissed. Appellant’s motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal is denied.

STEVE SMITH

Justice

OPINION DELIVERED and FILED: April 9, 2026 Before Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Smith, and Justice Harris Appeal dismissed; Motion denied Do not publish CR25

Ex parte Ethan Frederick Hill Page 3