Ex Parte Ezra Pleasant

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-11-00629-CR Ex parte Ezra Pleasant

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY, 22ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. CR-02-0333C, HONORABLE CHARLES R. RAMSAY, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION Ezra Pleasant pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated sexual assault of a child and two counts of indecency with a child by contact. Punishment was assessed at ten years’ imprisonment for each count, but, on the jury’s recommendation, the district court suspended imposition of the sentence and placed Pleasant on community supervision. This Court affirmed the judgments of conviction on appeal. See Pleasant v. State, No. 03-03-00514-CR, 2005 Tex. App. LEXIS 856 (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 3, 2005, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).1

In March 2008, Pleasant filed an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.072 of the code of criminal procedure, the article establishing the procedures for an application for a writ of habeas corpus in a case in which the applicant seeks relief from an order or a judgment of conviction ordering community supervision. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.072 (West 2005).2 In a nunc pro tunc order signed on January 30, 2009, the district court denied Pleasant habeas relief and adopted findings of fact and conclusions of law in support. On August 11, 2011—more than two years after the district court’s order—Pleasant filed a notice of appeal from the order, giving rise to this cause.

The rules of appellate procedure require that a defendant file his notice of appeal within 30 days after the trial court “enters an appealable order.” Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1); see also Ex parte Delgado, 214 S.W.3d 56, 58 (applying rule 26.2(a)(1) to order denying habeas relief under article 11.072). For the purposes of the appellate timetable, a trial court “enters” an order when it signs the order. See State v. Rosenbaum, 818 S.W.2d 398, 401-03 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Ortiz v. State, 299 S.W.3d 930, 933 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2009, no pet.); State v. Rollins, 4 S.W.3d 453, 454-55 (Tex. App.—Austin 1999, no pet.). The district court signed the appealable order in January 2009, yet Pleasant did not file his notice of appeal until August 11, 2011, more than two years thereafter.3 A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke this Court’s jurisdiction. See Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Under these circumstances, we must dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.4 The appeal is dismissed.

__________________________________________ Bob Pemberton, Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Rose Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction Filed: March 21, 2012 Do Not Publish