Ross Thomas Brantley, III v. the State of Texas
This text of Ross Thomas Brantley, III v. the State of Texas (Ross Thomas Brantley, III v. the State of Texas) 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.
Opinion
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________
No. 02-25-00231-CR ___________________________
ROSS THOMAS BRANTLEY, III, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 1 Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1609793
Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Birdwell, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant Ross Thomas Brantley, III attempts to appeal the trial court’s denial
of his motion for postconviction forensic DNA testing. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc.
Ann. art. 64.05. But Brantley’s notice of appeal is untimely—it was due “within 30
days . . . after the day the trial court enter[ed the] appealable order,” Tex. R. App. P.
26.2(a)(1), but it was filed more than 100 days after the order was signed.
Because “[o]ur appellate jurisdiction is triggered through a timely notice of
appeal,” we lack jurisdiction over Brantley’s untimely appeal and “can take no action
other than to dismiss [it].”1 Evans v. State, No. 02-22-00093-CR, 2022 WL 2252632, at
*1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth June 23, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for
publication) (dismissing untimely appeal from order denying motion for DNA
testing); Manns, 2015 WL 5893122, at *1 (same); McCain v. State, No. 02-13-00459-CR,
2013 WL 6157123, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Nov. 21, 2013, no pet.) (per
curiam) (not designated for publication) (same).
Accordingly, we dismiss Brantley’s appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R.
App. P. 43.2(f).
1 When we notified Brantley of our jurisdictional concern, he sought leave to pursue an untimely appeal, explaining that he had mailed a notice of appeal to a federal district court before the deadline but the mail had been returned for insufficient postage. However, “we cannot suspend the rules of appellate procedure to extend the time for filing a notice of appeal.” Manns v. State, No. 02-15-00247-CR, 2015 WL 5893122, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Oct. 8, 2015, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
2 /s/ Bonnie Sudderth
Bonnie Sudderth Chief Justice
Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: August 7, 2025
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ross Thomas Brantley, III v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-thomas-brantley-iii-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.