Pedro Agustin Ramirezfacio v. the State of Texas
Opinion
DISMISS and Opinion Filed January 20, 2023
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00032-CR
PEDRO AGUSTIN RAMIREZFACIO, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 291st Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F19-76421-U
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Nowell, and Kennedy Opinion by Justice Nowell Pedro Agustin Ramirezfacio appeals his conviction for aggravated sexual
assault of a child. The record demonstrates we lack jurisdiction over the appeal
because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Accordingly, we dismiss the
appeal for want of jurisdiction.
A defendant perfects his appeal by timely filing a written notice of appeal with
the trial court clerk. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(c). To be timely, the notice of appeal
must be filed within thirty days after the date sentence was imposed or within ninety
days after sentencing if the defendant timely filed a motion for new trial. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a). The rules of appellate procedure allow the time to file a notice of
appeal to be extended if the party files, within fifteen days of the filing deadline, the
notice of appeal in the trial court and a motion to extend the time to file the notice
of appeal in the court of appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b), 26.3. In the absence
of a timely perfected notice of appeal, the Court must dismiss the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction. Ex parte Castillo, 369 S.W.3d 196, 198 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012); Slaton
v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (per curiam).
Here, the trial court imposed sentence on July 21, 2021. Appellant timely
moved for a new trial on July 21, 2021, which extended the time for appellant to
perfect his appeal to October 19, 2021. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(2). Any motion to
extend the time to file the notice of appeal would have been due on or before
November 3, 2021. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. Appellant filed his notice of appeal
on either November 1, 2022, or December 14, 2022, depending on whether the
November 1, 2022 document is a notice of appeal. Thus, appellant’s notice of appeal
is not timely, and we lack jurisdiction over this appeal. Ex parte Castillo, 369
S.W.3d at 198.
Appellant requests an “out of time” appeal. Although we lack authority to
grant such a request, appellant may file an application for a writ of habeas corpus in
order to pursue an out-of-time appeal. See Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802
S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (orig. proceeding).
–2– We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
/Erin A. Nowell/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 230032F.U05
–3– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
PEDRO AGUSTIN On Appeal from the 291st Judicial RAMIREZFACIO, Appellant District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F19-76421-U. No. 05-23-00032-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell. Justices Partida-Kipness and THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Kennedy participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Judgment entered January 20, 2023
–4–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Pedro Agustin Ramirezfacio v. the State of Texas (Pedro Agustin Ramirezfacio v. the State of Texas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.