Frederick Louis Pitts v. The State of Texas Appeal from 85th District Court of Brazos County (memorandum opinion)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-17-00220-CR FREDERICK LOUIS PITTS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee From the 85th District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 08-03413-CRF-85 MEMORANDUM OPINION Frederick Louis Pitts was convicted of two counts of sexual assault of a child in 2012. His subsequent appeal was dismissed for want of jurisdiction because his notice of appeal was untimely. See Pitts v. State, No. 10-13-00271-CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 10613 (Tex. App.—Waco Aug. 22, 2013, no pet.) (not designated for publication). His next appeal was dismissed because we lacked jurisdiction to grant an out-of-time appeal as Pitts requested. See Pitts v. State, No. 10-16-00026-CR, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 903 (Tex. App.—Waco Jan. 28, 2016, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication). Pitts has now filed another appeal of his 2012 convictions. His notice of appeal is untimely, and we have no jurisdiction of an untimely appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (no appellate jurisdiction where notice of appeal is untimely). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.1 TOM GRAY Chief Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed July 19, 2017 Do not publish [CRPM] A motion for rehearing may be filed within 15 days after the judgment of this Court is rendered. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1. If the appellant desires to have the decision of this Court reviewed by filing a petition for discretionary review, that petition must be filed with the Court of Criminal Appeals within 30 days after either the day this Court’s judgment was rendered or the day the last timely motion for rehearing was overruled by this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 68.2(a). 1 Pitts v. State Page 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.