Roy Dean Evans v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 15, 2004
Docket13-03-00723-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Roy Dean Evans v. State (Roy Dean Evans 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
Roy Dean Evans v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion



NUMBER 13-03-723-CR


COURT OF APPEALS


THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_______________________________________________________


ROY DEAN EVANS,                                                          Appellant,


v.


THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                      Appellee.


On appeal from the 130th District Court

of Matagorda County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Opinion Per Curiam


         Appellant, ROY DEAN EVANS, attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment entered by the 130th District Court of Matagorda County, Texas. Sentence in this cause was imposed on September 2, 2003. An untimely motion for new trial was filed on October 3, 2003. The notice of appeal was due to be filed on October 2, 2003, but was not filed until November 26, 2003. 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 filed an untimely motion to extend time to file motion for new trial and notice of appeal on December 15, 2003.

         The Court, having considered the documents on file, appellant's failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant’s untimely motion to extend time to file notice of appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant’s untimely motion to extend time to file motion for new trial and notice of appeal is DISMISSED. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.

                                                                                 PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Opinion delivered and filed this

the 15th day of January, 2004.


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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Roy Dean Evans v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roy-dean-evans-v-state-texapp-2004.