Jose Ernest Adame v. The State of Texas Appeal from 177th District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed December 18, 2018. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-18-01034-CR JOSE ERNEST ADAME, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 177th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1426474 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Jose Ernest Adame pleaded guilty to assault of a family member with bodily injury. Appellant and the State agreed appellant’s punishment would not exceed three years’ imprisonment. On June 9, 2014, the trial court sentenced appellant in accordance with the terms of his agreement with the State. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on November 12, 2018. We lack jurisdiction over this appeal for two reasons: the notice of appeal was not filed timely, and this is a plea bargain case with no appealable matters and appellant has not been granted permission to appeal. First, 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 26.2 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. Appellant’s notice of appeal was filed more than four years after sentence was imposed. Therefore, the appeal was not timely perfected, and we lack jurisdiction. Second, in a plea bargain case—that is, a case in which a defendant’s plea was guilty or nolo contendere and the punishment did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant—a defendant may appeal only matters raised by a written, pretrial motion or with the trial court’s permission. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). Appellant’s punishment does not exceed the agreed length of confinement. The record does not contain any appealable pretrial rulings, and the trial court did not grant appellant permission to appeal. Accordingly, we DISMISS the appeal. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Christopher, and Jewell. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 2
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.
