Ernesto Cantu v. The State of TexasAppeal from County Criminal Court of Appeals No. 1 of Dallas County (memorandum opinion )

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISMISS; Opinion Filed July 30, 2013. In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-00148-CR ERNESTO CANTU, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Criminal Court of Appeals No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MC-11-R-0006-D MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Evans Opinion by Justice Lang A Coppell municipal court jury convicted Ernesto Cantu of class C misdemeanor theft and assessed a $500 fine. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. ยงยง 12.23 (West 2011), 31.03(a),(e)(1)(A) (West Supp. 2012). Cantu appealed to the Dallas County Criminal Court of Appeals, which issued a judgment on October 3, 2012 affirming the municipal court s judgment. Cantu did not file a motion for new trial, making his notice of appeal due no later than November 2, 2012 or, with an extension motion, no later than November 19, 2012. See TEX. RS. APP. P. 4.1(a), 26.2(a), 26.3. Cantu s notice of appeal, however, was not filed until December 5, 2012. A timely notice of appeal is essential to vest this Court with jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (per curiam). Because Cantu s notice of appeal was untimely, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal and dismiss. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). /Douglas S. Lang/ DOUGLAS S. LANG JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47 130148F.U05 2 Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT ERNESTO CANTU, Appellant No. 05-13-00148-CR On Appeal from the County Criminal Court of Appeals No. 1, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MC-11-R-0006-D. Opinion delivered by Justice Lang. Justices Myers and Evans participating. V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Based on the Court s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Judgment entered this 30th day of July, 2013. /Lana Myers/ DOUGLAS S. LANG JUSTICE 3

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.