In the Interest of M.P.A.and J.A.A., Children v. the State of Texas

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-25-00174-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M.P.A. AND J.A.A., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 Randall County, Texas Trial Court No. 82674L1, Honorable James W. Anderson, Presiding

September 10, 2025 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before PARKER and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ.

Appellant, Jacqua Sharee Trevino, proceeding pro se, appeals from the trial court’s

Order in Suit for Modification of Child Support Obligation after De Novo Hearing. We

dismiss the untimely appeal for want of jurisdiction.

The trial court signed the order on April 24, 2025. Because no motion for new trial,

motion to modify the judgment, or requests for findings were filed, the notice of appeal

was due within thirty days, by May 27, 2025. See TEX. R. APP. P. 4.1(a), 26.1(a).

Appellant filed a notice of appeal on May 29, 2025, without filing a motion for an extension

of time. A timely notice of appeal is essential to invoking this court’s jurisdiction. TEX. R.

APP. P. 25.1(b), 26.1. We may extend the time to file a notice of appeal by fifteen days if

an appellant files a notice of appeal and a motion for an extension of time that reasonably

explains the need for an extension. TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 26.3. Although a motion for

extension is implied if the notice of appeal is filed within fifteen days after the notice

deadline, an appellant must still reasonably explain the delay in filing the notice of appeal

when a motion for extension is implied. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617

(Tex. 1997); Jones v. City of Houston, 976 S.W.2d 676, 677 (Tex. 1998).

Here, Appellant filed a notice of appeal within fifteen days of the appellate deadline

but did not file a motion for an extension of time. By letter of August 21, 2025, we notified

Appellant that a motion for extension was implied and directed her to file a written

response explaining why her notice of appeal was filed untimely. We advised Appellant

that if she did not file a response by September 2, 2025, we would dismiss the appeal for

want of jurisdiction. Appellant has not filed a response to date.

Because Appellant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for her untimely

notice of appeal, we cannot grant an implied motion for extension. See TEX. R. APP. P.

10.5(b), 26.3; Phillips v. Gunn, No. 07-14-00094-CV, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 4027, at *2–

3 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Apr. 11, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op.). Accordingly, her late notice of

appeal failed to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.

Per Curiam