Michael Wayne Hancock v. State

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ____________________ NO. 09-14-00349-CR NO. 09-14-00350-CR ____________________

MICHAEL WAYNE HANCOCK, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _______________________________________________________ ______________

On Appeal from the 75th District Court Liberty County, Texas Trial Cause Nos. CR28749 and CR28750 ________________________________________________________ _____________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On June 12, 2014, and June 23, 2014, the trial court signed judgments nunc

pro tunc for Cause Numbers CR28749 and CR28750, respectively. Michael Wayne

Hancock filed a notice of appeal on August 11, 2014. We notified the parties that

the appeals would be dismissed because the notice of appeal was filed outside the

time for which an extension may be granted for filing a notice of appeal. Hancock

did not file a response.

1 A judgment nunc pro tunc is an appealable order. Blanton v. State, 369

S.W.3d 894, 903 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012). To perfect an appeal, the notice of

appeal must be filed within thirty days of the date that the trial court signs the

judgment nunc pro tunc. Dewalt v. State, 417 S.W.3d 678, 689 (Tex. App.—Austin

2013), pet. ref’d, 426 S.W.3d 100 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Hancock’s notice of

appeal recites that he filed a motion for new trial on July 18, 2014, but the filing of

a motion for new trial extends the time for perfecting appeal only when it is filed

within thirty days of the day sentence is imposed. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(2).

“If a notice of appeal is not timely filed, the court of appeals has no option

but to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.” Castillo v. State, 369 S.W.3d

196, 198 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012). Hancock failed to file his notice of appeal within

thirty days of the date the trial court signed either judgment nunc pro tunc, and he

failed to file a motion for extension of time within fifteen days of the due date for a

notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1), 26.3. Therefore, we dismiss the

appeals for lack of jurisdiction.

APPEALS DISMISSED.

________________________________ LEANNE JOHNSON Justice Submitted on October 14, 2014 Opinion Delivered October 15, 2014 Do Not Publish Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.