Oscar Moreno v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 384th District Court of El Paso County

Annotate this Case

COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

 
OSCAR MORENO,

Appellant,

 

v.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 

Appellee.

 

 
No. 08-07-00316-CR

Appeal from the

 

384th Impact District Court

 

of El Paso County, Texas

 

(TC# 20050D05040)

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

Oscar Moreno attempts to appeal his conviction for delivery of marijuana. Finding that Appellant has not timely filed his notice of appeal, or motion for an extension of time, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

The record before us reflects that sentence was imposed in open court on September 7, 2007. Appellant did not file a motion for new trial. Appellant's notice of appeal was not filed until October 31, 2007. By letter dated December 27, 2007, the clerk of this Court notified Appellant in writing of our intent to dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. Appellant has not responded to the Court's notice.

A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke this Court's jurisdiction. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996). Appellant's notice of appeal was due to be filed on October 7, 2007, thirty days after the date sentence was imposed in open court. See Tex.R.App.P. 26.2(a)(1). Pursuant to Rule 26.3, a court of appeals may grant an extension of time to file a notice of appeal if the notice is filed within fifteen days after the last day allowed, and within the same period, a motion is filed with the court of appeals reasonably explaining the need for the extension of time. Tex.R.App.P. 26.3; Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522. Because Appellant did not file his notice of appeal until October 31, 2007, and did not file a motion for extension of time, he failed to perfect the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

 

January 25, 2008

DAVID WELLINGTON CHEW, Chief Justice

 

Before Chew, C.J., McClure, and Carr, JJ.

 

(Do Not Publish)

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.