Julius Jermaine Jordan v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: February 6, 2019
• Docket: 09-18-00458-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________ NO. 09-18-00456-CR NO. 09-18-00457-CR NO. 09-18-00458-CR ____________________

JULIUS JERMAINE JORDAN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee ________________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 128th District Court Orange County, Texas Trial Cause Nos. A170058-R, A170061-R, and A170064-R ________________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On November 1, 2018, the trial court signed orders nunc pro tunc granting

credit for jail time in trial court case numbers A170058-R, A170061-R, and

A170064-R. Notice of appeal was due to be filed by December 3, 2018. See Tex. R.

App. P. 26.2(a)(1). On December 6, 2018, the trial court clerk received and filed a

notice of appeal dated December 4, 2018. On December 10, 2018, we notified Jordan

1 that an extension of time was required because the notice of appeal was filed late but

within fifteen days of the date it was due. See generally Tex. R. App. P. 26.3; see

also Tex. R. App. P. 4.1(a). Jordan filed a motion for extension of time for trial court

case number A170061-R with the trial court clerk on December 21, 2018. The

motion was dated December 17, 2018, but was not addressed to the proper court.

See Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(b). No motion for extension of time was filed with the Court

of Appeals within fifteen days of the last day for perfecting the appeals. See Tex. R.

App. P. 26.3.

On January 8, 2019, we notified the parties that the appeals would be

dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Jordan filed a response in which he argued that he

perfected his appeal timely because he submitted the notice of appeal to the prison

mail room officials within thirty days of the date that he received notice that the trial

court had signed orders nunc pro tunc. However, the time for perfecting an appeal

runs from the date the order is signed, not the date the defendant learns the order has

been signed. See Davis v. State, 502 S.W.3d 803, 803 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016);

Rodarte v. State, 860 S.W.2d 108, 109–10 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993). We lack the

authority to suspend the rules with regard to the time for perfecting an appeal. See

Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210(Tex. Crim. App. 1998). Accordingly, we

dismiss the appeals for lack of jurisdiction.

2 APPEALS DISMISSED.

________________________________ CHARLES KREGER Justice

Submitted on February 5, 2019 Opinion Delivered February 6, 2019 Do Not Publish

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