Michael Wesley Johnson v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 22, 2006
Docket13-06-00263-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Michael Wesley Johnson v. State (Michael Wesley Johnson 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
Michael Wesley Johnson v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

                             NUMBER 13-06-263-CR

                         COURT OF APPEALS

               THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                  CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_________________________________________________________

MICHAEL WESLEY JOHNSON,                             Appellant,

                                           v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                       Appellee.

                   On appeal from the 24th District Court

                           of De Witt County, Texas.

                     MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Yañez and Garza

                       Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, MICHAEL WESLEY JOHNSON, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 24th District Court of De Witt County, Texas.  Sentence in this cause was imposed on June 9, 2004.  No timely motion for new trial was filed.  The notice of appeal was due to be filed on July 8, 2004, but was not filed until April 27, 2006.   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Do not publish.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 22nd day of June, 2006.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Michael Wesley Johnson v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-wesley-johnson-v-state-texapp-2006.