John Bradley Ickes v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

John Bradley Ickes v. State

DecidedApril 21, 2005

Docket13-05-00100-CR

StatusPublished

This text of John Bradley Ickes v. State (John Bradley Ickes 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

John Bradley Ickes v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

NUMBER 13-05-100-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_________________________________________________________________ _

JOHN BRADLEY ICKES, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

__________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 182nd District Court

of Harris County, Texas.

___________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Castillo, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, JOHN BRADLEY ICKES, attempted to perfect an appeal from an order denying DNA testing entered by the 182nd District Court of Harris County, Texas. The order from which this appeal is taken was signed on November 16, 2004. No timely motion for new trial was filed. The notice of appeal was due to be filed on December 16, 2004, but was not filed until December 30, 2004. Said notice of appeal is untimely filed.

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 a motion requesting an extension of time within such period.

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant's failure to timely perfect his appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 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Do not publish.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 21st day of April, 2005.

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