Jorge Barron v. State
This text of Jorge Barron v. State (Jorge Barron 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.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH
NO. 2-08-170-CR
JORGE BARRON APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
------------
FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 1 OF DENTON COUNTY
MEMORANDUM OPINION 1
On February 20, 2008, the trial court sentenced appellant Jorge Barron
to three hundred sixty five days’ confinement and a $2,021 fine upon his
conviction by a jury for misdemeanor assault-family violence. Appellant timely
filed a motion for new trial; thus, his notice of appeal was due May 20, 2008.
See T EX. R. A PP. P. 26.2(a)(2).
1 … See T EX. R. A PP. P. 47.4. On July 10, 2008, we notified appellant of our concern that we lacked
jurisdiction over this appeal because his notice of appeal was not filed in the
trial court until May 22, 2008.2 We informed appellant that the appeal was
subject to dism issal unless he filed a response on or before July 21, 2008
advising us whether the mailbox rule applies in this case. See T EX. R. A PP. P.
9.2(b). Appellant has not filed a response.
A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of rule 26 of the
rules of appellate procedure is essential to vest this court with jurisdiction over
an appeal. See T EX. R. A PP. P. 26.2(a)(1); Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208,
210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); York v. State, 69 S.W.3d 792, 793 (Tex.
App.—Fort Worth 2002, no pet.). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has
expressly held that without a timely filed notice of appeal or motion for
extension of time, we cannot exercise jurisdiction over an appeal. See Olivo v.
State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Because appellant’s
notice of appeal was untimely filed and he did not timely file a motion for
2 … Appellant did not file a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal. See T EX. R. A PP. P. 26.3.
2 extension of time, we dismiss this case for want of jurisdiction. See T EX. R.
A PP. P. 43.2(f).
PER CURIAM
PANEL: LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and HOLMAN, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH T EX. R. A PP. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: August 21, 2008
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jorge Barron v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jorge-barron-v-state-texapp-2008.