Robert Ray Maggard v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 8, 2001
Docket06-01-00174-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Robert Ray Maggard v. State (Robert Ray Maggard 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
Robert Ray Maggard v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion



In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana



______________________________


No. 06-01-00174-CR
______________________________


ROBERT RAY MAGGARD, Appellant


V.


THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee





On Appeal from the 228th Judicial District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court No. 755608





Before Cornelius, C.J., Grant and Ross, JJ.
Opinion by Chief Justice Cornelius


O P I N I O N


Robert Ray Maggard pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault of a child. The trial court sentenced him to forty years' imprisonment on December 18, 1997. Maggard did not file a motion for new trial; therefore, his notice of appeal was due by January 20, 1998, or with a proper request for an extension, by February 4, 1998. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1), 26.3. Maggard did not file a notice of appeal.

On August 15, 2001, Maggard filed a motion for out of time appeal in the district court, which was assigned to the First Court of Appeals. The First Court of Appeals docketed the case, but the matter was transferred to this Court pursuant to an order from the Texas Supreme Court.

Because Maggard did not file a timely notice of appeal, we lack jurisdiction. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). (1)

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.



William J. Cornelius

Chief Justice



Date Submitted: November 8, 2001

Date Decided: November 8, 2001



Do Not Publish

1. In Olivo, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals noted that the denial of a meaningful appeal because of ineffective assistance of counsel is a proper ground for habeas corpus relief. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 525 n.8 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon Supp. 2001).

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

Related

Olivo v. State
918 S.W.2d 519 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Robert Ray Maggard v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-ray-maggard-v-state-texapp-2001.