Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2002

Nicolas Dameon McFalls v. State

Nicolas Dameon McFalls v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided July 1, 2002

Nicolas Dameon McFalls v. State

Opinion

NO. 07-02-0078-CR


IN THE COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


AT AMARILLO


PANEL A


JULY 1, 2002



______________________________




NICOLAS DAMEON MCFALLS, APPELLANT


V.


THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE




_________________________________


FROM THE 251ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;


NO. 43,774-C; HONORABLE ROBERT MONTGOMERY, JUDGE


_______________________________


Before BOYD, C.J., and REAVIS and JOHNSON, JJ.

On April 23, 2002, this court issued its opinion and entered judgment dismissing an appeal by appellant Nicholas Dameon McFalls. The appeal was based upon appellant's having filed a "Notice of Appeal and Motion for New Trial" referencing judgment and sentence "entered on July 28, 2001" in Cause No. 43-774-C in the 251st District Court of Potter County (the trial court).



On June 26, 2002, the trial court clerk filed with the clerk of this court a copy of another document filed with the trial court clerk on June 20, 2002, by appellant. The document is entitled "Notice of Appeal and Motion for New Trial," designates Cause No. 43-774-C in the 251st District Court of Potter County, and references a judgment and sentence entered on July 28, 2001.

We have previously considered appellant's attempt to appeal from the judgment of the trial court convicting him and sentencing him to incarceration in Cause No. 43-774-C, although the judgment is based on a hearing and sentence imposed on July 26, 2001, not July 28, 2001. As noted, our opinion and judgment were dated April 23, 2002. Because appellant has previously appealed from the trial court's judgment in Cause No. 43-774-C, we consider his latest filing to be a motion for rehearing. See Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 49.

The motion is untimely. See TRAP 49.1, 49.8. We have no jurisdiction to consider it. Accordingly, appellant's motion is dismissed.



Phil Johnson

Justice





Do not publish.

QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>

NO. 07-10-00416-CR

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

AT AMARILLO

 

PANEL A

 

APRIL 1, 2011

 

 

ROBERT DEWAYNE BENNETT, APPELLANT

 

v.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

 

 

 FROM THE 355TH DISTRICT COURT OF HOOD COUNTY;

 

NO. CR11349; HONORABLE RALPH H. WALTON JR., JUDGE

 

 

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

 

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

            Robert Dewayne Bennett appealed his conviction for possession of less than one gram of a controlled substance and the resulting sentence of fifteen years’ imprisonment.

            Bennett’s counsel has notified this Court that Bennett has passed away and, in light of his passing, has moved this Court to permanently abate Bennett’s appeal.  The death of an appellant during the pendency of his or her appeal deprives this Court of jurisdiction. Tex. R. App. P. 7.1(a)(2); Whitmire v. State, 943 S.W.2d 894, 895 (Tex.Crim.App. 1997).

            Accordingly, we grant the motion and permanently abate this appeal.

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Mackey K. Hancock

                                                                                                            Justice

 

           


Do not publish. 

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑