JAMES PLEXICO v. THE STATE OF TEXASAppeal from ... of ... County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-13-00362-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________ JAMES PLEXICO, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 94th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Benavides, Perkes, and Longoria Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, James Plexico, pro se, filed a notice of appeal on July 17, 2013. On July 19, 2013, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that there is no final, appealable order and requested correction of this defect within ten days or the appeal would be dismissed. Appellant has failed to respond to the Court s directive. A defendant's notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the trial court enters an appealable order. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal which 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. Id. Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. Id. Generally, a state appellate court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant where there has been a final judgment of conviction. Workman v. State, 170 Tex. Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). Exceptions to the general rule include: (1) certain appeals while on deferred adjudication community supervision, Kirk v. State, 942 S.W.2d 624, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); (2) appeals from the denial of a motion to reduce bond, TEX. R. APP. P. 31.1; McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161; and (3) certain appeals from the denial of habeas corpus relief, Wright v. State, 969 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1998, no pet.); McKown, 915 S.W.2d at 161. The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents before the Court, is of the opinion that there is not an appealable order and this Court lacks jurisdiction. .Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Delivered and filed the 17th day of October, 2013. 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.
