Koty Holmes v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 262nd District Court of Harris County

Annotate this Case
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 6, 2007

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed September 6, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-07-00347-CR

____________

KOTY HOLMES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1068048

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant pled guilty to the offense of theft and, in accordance with a plea bargain with the State, the trial court entered an order on May 10, 2006, deferring adjudication of guilt and placing appellant on community supervision for three years. The State subsequently moved to adjudicate guilt. Appellant signed a stipulation of evidence, agreeing that he had violated the terms and conditions of probation, and, on July 13, 2006, the trial court adjudicated appellant guilty of the offense of theft and sentenced appellant to six months in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. No timely motion for new trial was filed. Appellant=s notice of appeal was not filed until April 9, 2007.


A defendant=s notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after sentence is imposed when the defendant has not filed a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of Rule 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). If an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal. Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. Id.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed September 6, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Fowler, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P.47.2(b).

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.