Jeremy Steven Clary v. the State of Texas
This text of Jeremy Steven Clary v. the State of Texas (Jeremy Steven Clary v. the State of Texas) 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
In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
__________________
NO. 09-23-00399-CR __________________
JEREMY STEVEN CLARY, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
__________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 411th District Court San Jacinto County, Texas Trial Cause No. CR13,824 __________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On November 2, 2023, the trial court sentenced Jeremy Steven Clary after a
jury found Clary guilty of sexual assault of a child in Trial Cause Number CR13,824.
After Clary was found guilty and sentenced in Trial Cause Number CR13,824, in a
different case in Trial Cause Number CR14,088, on November 16, 2023, the State
filed a motion to dismiss and the trial court dismissed an indictment that charged
Clary with indecency with a child. On December 8, 2023, Clary filed a pro se notice
of appeal from the judgment in Trial Cause Number CR14,088. On February 24,
1 2024, Clary filed an amended notice of appeal that changed the trial cause number
in his previous notice of appeal from CR14,088 to CR13,824.
A clerical defect in a notice of appeal should not be described as affecting
jurisdiction. Few v. State, 230 S.W.3d 184, 189 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). If a notice
of appeal mistakenly recites the wrong case number, the appellate court must provide
a reasonable opportunity for the appellant to amend the notice of appeal to correct
the information required by Rule 25.2(c). Id. at 190. An appellant may correct a
defect in a notice of appeal by filing an amended notice of appeal that relates back
to the date the appellant filed the defective notice of appeal. See Tex R. App. P.
25.2(f). But Rule 25.2(f) cannot be used to enlarge the appellate court’s jurisdiction
See State v. Riewe, 13 S.W.3d 408, 413-14 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).
The trial court sentenced Clary in Trial Cause Number 13,824 on November
2, 2023. Clary did not file a motion for new trial. To perfect his appeal, Clary had to
file a notice of appeal by Monday, December 4, 2023. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1);
see also Tex. R. App. P. 4.1(a). To obtain an extension of time to file his notice of
appeal, Clary had to file the notice of appeal with the trial court within fifteen days
of the date the notice was due, and he also had to file a motion for an extension of
time with the appellate court. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Clary failed to timely request
an extension of time to file his notice of appeal. “When a notice of appeal, but no
motion for extension of time, is filed within the fifteen-day period, the court of
2 appeals lacks jurisdiction to dispose of the purported appeal in any manner other
than by dismissing it for lack of jurisdiction.” Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 523
(Tex. Crim. App. 1996). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on April 16, 2024 Opinion Delivered April 17, 2024 Do Not Publish
Before Horton, Johnson and Wright, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jeremy Steven Clary v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jeremy-steven-clary-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.