Jaime Flores v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 12, 2024
• Docket: 08-24-00143-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

JAIME FLORES, § No. 08-24-00143-CR

Appellant, § Appeal from the

v. § 41st Judicial District Court

THE STATE OF TEXAS, § of El Paso County, Texas

Appellee. § (TC#20170D02631)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is before the Court on its own motion to determine whether it should be

dismissed for want of jurisdiction. On June 11, 2024, Appellant Jamie Flores filed a notice of

appeal in this Court regarding a judgment entered against him on October 19, 2019. We understand

his appeal to complain about his location of confinement and conditions of confinement (including

the rules and policies of the facility), which Appellant asserts violate his plea agreement with the

State.

The notice of appeal was drafted and prepared by Antonio Andres Garcia, but it was also

signed and adopted by Appellant as a pro se filing. This Court sent notice to Appellant advising

him that Mr. Garcia, as an unlicensed attorney, could not represent him in this appeal. Additionally,

the notice advised Appellant that the appeal appeared to be untimely filed and was thus subject to dismissal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2 (requiring the notice of appeal in a criminal case to be filed

within 30 days of sentence pronouncement, or within 90 days if there is no motion for new trial).

Appellant responded to this Court’s notice on July 1, 2024, by filing a response, motion to

appoint counsel, motion for hearing on indigency, and a motion for certification of the defendant’s

right of appeal. In his response and motions, we understand Appellant to clarify that he is not

challenging his conviction or attempting to appeal, but rather is complaining about court

procedures and asking this Court to remand his cause to the trial court to revise his plea agreement

and reduce his sentence by four years. Appellant’s response and motions do not assert that his

appeal is timely, nor do they show grounds for this Court’s jurisdiction.

A timely-filed notice of appeal is a jurisdictional prerequisite to perfecting an appeal.

See Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (en banc). Only the Court of

Criminal Appeals has jurisdiction to grant Appellant an out-of-time appeal of his felony

conviction. See Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (en

banc) (explaining that writ of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.07 of the Texas Code of

Criminal Procedure governs out-of-time appeals from felony convictions). If a notice of appeal is

untimely, an appellate court must dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Castillo v. State, 369

S.W.3d 196, 198 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012); Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). Therefore, we dismiss this

appeal for want of jurisdiction. All pending motions are denied as moot.

LISA J. SOTO, Justice

July 12, 2024

Before Alley, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)