Opinion filed February 7, 2008

                                                                        In The

    Eleventh Court of Appeals

                                                                 ____________

                                                          No. 11-08-00010-CR

                                                    __________

                                 JIMMY DALE NORVELL, Appellant

                                                             V.

                                         STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

                                         On Appeal from the 104th District Court

                                                          Taylor County, Texas

                                                  Trial Court Cause No. 16460-B

                                                                   O P I N I O N

The trial court convicted Jimmy Dale Norvell of aggregate theft by check and assessed his punishment at confinement for one year in a state jail facility.  The trial court imposed the sentence in open court on November 26, 2007.  A motion for new trial was not filed, and a pro se notice of appeal was filed on January 9, 2008, forty-four days after the date the sentence was imposed in open court.  In its certification of defendant=s right to appeal, the trial court stated that appellant had waived his right to appeal.  We dismiss the appeal.

On January 10, 2008, the clerk of this court wrote the parties and informed them that it appeared that an appeal had not been timely perfected.  Appellant was advised to respond to this court on or before January 28, 2008, showing grounds for continuing his appeal.

Appellant has responded by filing a pro se motion stating that he Ahad to plead guilty,@ that his indictment had been amended over his objections, and that his trial counsel was incompetent.  Appellant asks this court to appoint counsel and states that he Acannot and will not allow attorney of record to violate [his] rights and [attorney=s] oath any further.@

In order to timely perfect an appeal, the notice of appeal was due to be filed thirty days after the date sentence was imposed in open court.  Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1).  Appellant neither timely filed his notice of appeal nor filed a motion for extension of time pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 26.3.  Absent a timely notice of appeal or compliance with Rule 26.3, this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an appeal.  Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Rodarte v. State, 860 S.W.2d 108 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Shute v. State, 744 S.W.2d 96 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988).

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

February 7, 2008

Do not publish.  See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of:  Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.