Brandon Lee Nix v. State, No. 02-10-00348-CR (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Oct. 14, 2010). · Go Syfert
Search
Brandon Lee Nix v. State, No. 02-10-00348-CR (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Oct. 14, 2010). Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Brandon Lee Nix
v.
State
02-10-00348-CR.
Court of Appeals of Texas.
Oct 14, 2010.
Unpublished opinion
Published
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH

NO. 02-10-00348-CR

BRANDON LEE NIX APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

------------

FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF DENTON COUNTY

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

------------

On May 5, 2010, after finding that Appellant Brandon Lee Nix violated the terms and conditions of his community supervision, the trial court adjudicated Nix guilty of, and sentenced him to 120 days’ confinement for, misdemeanor theft of property with a value of $50 or more but less than $500. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 31.03(e)(2)(A)(i) (Vernon 2003).

of appeal or motion for extension of time, we cannot exercise jurisdiction over an appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Because there has been no showing that Nix’s motion for new trial was timely filed, his notice of appeal was correspondingly untimely. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MCCOY, MEIER and GABRIEL, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: October 14, 2010

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. Nix’s motion for new trial was due June 4, 2010, but it was not filed until June 7, 2010. See Tex. R. App. P. 21.4(a). Therefore, his notice of appeal was also due June 4, 2010. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a). On August 20, 2010, Nix filed his notice of appeal with a motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal.2 On September 9, 2010, we notified Nix’s counsel of the apparent untimeliness of the appeal; requested that he advise whether the motion for new trial was properly addressed, stamped, and mailed by the United States Postal Service to the proper trial court clerk on or before June 4, 2010; stated that any response must be filed on or before September 20, 2010; and stated that the appeal would be dismissed for want of jurisdiction if the court determined that the appeal was not timely perfected. See Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(b)(1), (2).3 We have received no response. A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of rule 26 is essential to vest this court with jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1) (providing that notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days of sentencing). The court of criminal appeals has expressly held that, without a timely filed notice
2 We denied Nix’s motion to extend time to file his notice of appeal on September 27, 2010, because without a showing that the motion for new trial was timely filed, the motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal was also untimely. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3.
3 Under rule of appellate procedure 9.2(b), a notice of appeal is timely only if it was deposited with the United States Postal Service on or before the last day for filing and received by the trial court within ten days after the filing deadline. Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(b)(1). Our September 9, 2010 letter also listed the items that we would accept as evidence of proof of mailing.