James Douglas Duke v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 13, 2018
Docket09-18-00191-CR
StatusPublished

This text of James Douglas Duke v. State (James Douglas Duke 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
James Douglas Duke v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-18-00191-CR ____________________

JAMES DOUGLAS DUKE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the 163rd District Court Orange County, Texas Trial Cause No. B140362-R ________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The trial court sentenced James Douglas Duke on March 27, 2018. In a

criminal case, the appeal must be filed within thirty days of the date the sentence is

imposed, or within ninety days if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial.

Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a). Duke did not file a motion for new trial within thirty days

of sentencing. Therefore, his notice of appeal was due to be filed on April 26, 2018.

Duke’s notice of appeal was postmarked on May 11, 2018, and filed on May 14,

2018. Duke did not file a motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal.

1 We notified the parties that Duke filed his notice of appeal too late to perfect an

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b) (“In a criminal case, appeal is perfected by timely

filing a sufficient notice of appeal.”). Duke filed a response but failed to establish

timely perfection of his appeal.

The Court finds that the notice of appeal was not timely filed. See Tex. R.

App. P. 26.2(a)(1). Duke also did not file a motion for extension of time to file his

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. “If a notice of appeal is not timely filed, the court

of appeals has no option but to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.” Castillo

v. State, 369 S.W.3d 196, 198 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012). Accordingly, we dismiss the

appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

________________________________ LEANNE JOHNSON Justice

Submitted on June 12, 2018 Opinion Delivered June 13, 2018 Do Not Publish

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.

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

Related

Castillo, Ex Parte Mario Amaro
369 S.W.3d 196 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
James Douglas Duke v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-douglas-duke-v-state-texapp-2018.