In the Interest of A.R., a Child v. Department of Family and Protective Services
This text of In the Interest of A.R., a Child v. Department of Family and Protective Services (In the Interest of A.R., a Child v. Department of Family and Protective Services) 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
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed May 23, 2024
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-24-00304-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF A.R., A CHILD
On Appeal from the 313th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2023-00382J
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal from a final decree for termination. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(b). The final decree was signed February 29, 2024. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on April 22, 2024.
An appeal in a parental termination suit is accelerated. Tex. R. App. P. 28.4(a)(2)(A). A notice of appeal in an accelerated case must be filed within twenty days after the judgment is signed. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(b). The deadline may be extended by fifteen days if, within that fifteen–day period, appellant files the notice of appeal in the trial court and a motion for extension of time in the court of appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3; Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Unlike in a non-accelerated appeal, a timely-filed motion for new trial does not extend the deadline to file the notice of appeal in an accelerated appeal. In re K.A.F., 160 S.W.3d 923, 926–27 (Tex. 2005).
Appellant’s notice of appeal was due March 20, 2024, but was not filed until April 22, 2024. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(b). A court of appeals lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal that was not timely perfected. When the court lacks jurisdiction, it must dismiss the appeal. See Baker v. Baker, 469 S.W.3d 269, 272 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2015, no pet.).
On May 1, 2024, we notified appellant that we would dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction if no party demonstrated meritorious grounds for retaining the appeal within 10 days. Appellant filed no response.
We dismiss the appeal.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Jewell, Zimmerer, and Hassan.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In the Interest of A.R., a Child v. Department of Family and Protective Services, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-ar-a-child-v-department-of-family-and-protective-texapp-2024.