Pavliska v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Pavliska v. State

499 S.W.2d 188

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJuly 17, 1973

DocketNo. 47286

StatusPublished

This text of 499 S.W.2d 188 (Pavliska v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pavliska v. State, 499 S.W.2d 188 (Tex. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

[189]*189OPINION

ROBERTS, Judge.

The offense is forgery; the punishment, five years. Appellant was placed on probation for this period.

Following entry of judgment, appellant timely filed a motion for new trial. Subsequently, but on the same day, appellant filed a notice of appeal. There is no indication that any action was taken by the trial court on the motion for new trial.

Appellant’s notice of appeal was premature and ineffective. This Court is now without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and the appeal must be dismissed. Menasco v. State (No. 46,222, June 13, 1973), motion to reinstate the appeal denied (No. 46,222, July 3, 1973).

For good cause, the trial court may still permit the giving of notice of appeal, and in such event, proceedings may then be had in the trial court pursuant to Article 40.09, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. See Article 44.08(e), V.A.C.C.P.

The appeal is dismissed.

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