Kenneth Jackson v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 390th District Court of Travis County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-02-00674-CR Kenneth Jackson, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 390TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 9024128, HONORABLE JULIE H. KOCUREK, JUDGE PRESIDING Kenneth Jackson seeks to appeal from a judgment of conviction for aggravated sexual assault and indecency with a child. Sentence was imposed on August 22, 2002. There was no motion for new trial. The deadline for perfecting appeal was therefore September 23, 2002. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1); see id. 4.1(a). The first attorney appointed to represent Jackson did not file a notice of appeal on Jackson=s behalf. On September 18, five days before the deadline for perfecting appeal, substitute counsel was appointed. This attorney, Jackson=s current counsel of record, did not file a notice of appeal. Jackson=s pro se notice of appeal was filed on September 24, 2002, one day late. No extension of time for perfecting appeal was requested. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3. Although the pro se notice of appeal is dated September 22, 2002, there is no indication that it was properly mailed to the district clerk within the time prescribed by rule 26.2(a). See Tex. R. App. P. 9.2(b). Under the circumstances, we lack jurisdiction to dispose of the purported appeal in any manner other than by dismissing it for want of jurisdiction. See Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208 (Tex. Crim. App.1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522-23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Jackson must obtain an out-of-time appeal by means of a post-conviction habeas corpus application. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2002). The appeal is dismissed. David Puryear, Justice Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices Patterson and Puryear Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction Filed: November 7, 2002 Do Not Publish 2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.
