Russell Wayne Peterson v. State
Russell Wayne Peterson v. State
Opinion
Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.
Appellant, Russell Wayne Peterson, appeals his conviction for forgery of a financial instrument. We dismiss the proceeding for lack of jurisdiction.
The judgment from which appellant is appealing indicates that sentence was imposed on March 9, 2005. Appellant then filed a notice of appeal on April 11, 2005.
To be timely, a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the sentence is imposed or suspended in open court or within 90 days after that date if a motion for new trial is filed. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a). No motion for new trial having been filed, appellant's notice of appeal was due to be filed April 8, 2005. Because the record discloses that appellant hand delivered the notice of appeal to the clerk on April 11, 2005, Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(b), without seeking an extension of the deadline, Tex. R. App. P. 26.3, the notice of appeal was late.
A timely filed notice of appeal is essential to invoke our appellate jurisdiction. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996). If it is untimely, we can take no action other than to dismiss the proceeding. Id. at 523. Appellant's notice being untimely filed, we have no jurisdiction over the matter and dismiss the appeal.
It is so ordered.
Per Curiam
Do not publish.
="0"/>
NO. 07-10-0046-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL C
FEBRUARY 17, 2010
______________________________
ROBERT PATRICK WHITEAKER AND
ROBERT WHITEAKER RANCHES, INC., APPELLANTS
V.
DOUG LATHEM, APPELLEE
_________________________________
FROM THE 69TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARTLEY COUNTY;
NO.4371-H; HONORABLE RON ENNS, JUDGE
_______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pending before this Court is Appellants' Motion to Dismiss Appeal Without Prejudice in which they represent that the issues presented in this appeal have been rendered moot by this Court's Order on Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Judgment rendered in cause number 07-10-00001-CV on February 4, 2010. Without passing on the merits of the case, the motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed without prejudice. Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1). Having dismissed the appeal at Appellants= request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.
Patrick A. Pirtle
Justice
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.