Jeffrey Rain Buckner Hill v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 28, 2004
Docket13-04-00493-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Jeffrey Rain Buckner Hill v. State (Jeffrey Rain Buckner Hill 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
Jeffrey Rain Buckner Hill v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion



NUMBER 13-04-493-CR


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

__________________________________________________________________


JEFFREY RAIN BUCKNER HILL,                                          Appellant,


v.


THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                      Appellee.

__________________________________________________________________


On appeal from the 139th District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Rodriguez, and Castillo

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellant, JEFFREY RAIN BUCKNER HILL, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 139th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. Sentence in this cause was imposed on April 23, 2004. A timely motion for new trial was filed on May 21, 2004. The notice of appeal was due to be filed on July 22, 2004, but was not filed until August 31, 2004. Said notice of appeal is untimely filed. Appellant filed an untimely motion to permit late filing of the notice of appeal on October 6, 2004.

         Tex. R. App. P. 26.3 provides that the court of appeals may grant an extension of time for filing notice of appeal if such notice is filed within fifteen days of the last day allowed and within the same period a motion is filed in the court of appeals reasonably explaining the need for such extension. Appellant failed to file his notice of appeal and motion requesting an extension of time within such period.

         The Court, having considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant’s untimely motion, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant’s untimely motion to permit late filing of notice of appeal is dismissed. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

                                                                                 PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this

the 28th day of October, 2004.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jeffrey Rain Buckner Hill v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jeffrey-rain-buckner-hill-v-state-texapp-2004.