Preston Harris v. State of Texas--Appeal from 118th District Court of Howard County

Annotate this Case
Opinion filed October 25, 2007

Opinion filed October 25, 2007

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals

____________

 No. 11-07-00267-CR

__________

 PRESTON HARRIS, Appellant

V.

STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 118th District Court

Howard County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 11359

O P I N I O N

Preston Harris was convicted of injury to an elderly individual, and his punishment was assessed at confinement for ninety-nine years. The trial court imposed the sentence in open court on May 8, 2007. On September 5, 2007, appellant filed both a motion for new trial and a notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

 

On September 24, 2007, the clerk of this court wrote the parties advising them that it appeared an appeal had not been timely perfected and requesting that appellant respond on or before October 9, 2007, showing grounds for continuing the appeal. Counsel has responded by forwarding a copy of the August 30, 2007 letter appointing him as appellate counsel and by advising this court that appellant has been moved from the Howard County Jail and that counsel is trying to contact appellant.

We note that counsel was not appointed until after the deadline for filing a motion for new trial or the deadline for filing a notice of appeal absent a motion for new trial. Absent a timely notice of appeal or compliance with Tex. R. App. P. 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). Appellant may be able to secure an out-of-time appeal by filing a post-conviction writ pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon 2005).

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

October 25, 2007

Do not publish.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

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

McCall, J., and Strange, J.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.