Frankie Bertolo Mercado v. The State of Texas Appeal from 262nd District Court of Harris County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Opinion issued December 8, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-16-00705-CR NO. 01-16-00706-CR ——————————— FRANKIE BARTOLO MERCADO, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 262nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case Nos. 1431364 & 1431388 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Frankie Bartolo Mercado, pleaded guilty to two counts of the firstdegree felony offense of aggravated robbery—deadly weapon, in the underlying trial court cause numbers 1431364 and 1431388.1 Pursuant to plea bargains in both cases, 1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 29.03(a)(2), (b) (West Supp. 2016). the State agreed to recommend that appellant’s punishment be assessed concurrently at fifteen years’ confinement. On February 1, 2016, in accordance with the terms of his plea bargains with the State, the trial court found appellant guilty and assessed his punishment at fifteen years’ confinement in each case, with the sentences to run concurrently.2 Appellant did not file his pro se combined notice of appeal for both cases until August 23, 2016. Appellant also filed several pro se letter-motions, including for bail and for an extension of time to file his brief, and his pro se appellant’s brief, in this Court. We dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction and dismiss the motions as moot. A criminal defendant’s notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after the sentence is imposed, if the defendant has not filed a motion for new trial. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of rule 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction. See Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522–23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). If an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal. See Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210. Here, the trial court signed appellant’s judgments of conviction in both cases on February 1, 2016, and imposed the concurrent sentence on that date. Appellant 2 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 12.32(a) (West Supp. 2016). 2 did not timely file a motion for new trial or extension of time to file a notice of appeal, making his notice of appeal due by March 2, 2016. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). Appellant’s combined notice of appeal was not filed until August 23, 2016, more than six months after the judgment was signed. See id. Thus, under these circumstances, we can take no action other than to dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction.3 See Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210; Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 526. Accordingly, we dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). We dismiss all pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Lloyd. Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 3 Moreover, even if appellant had timely appealed, these appeals must be dismissed because the trial court’s certifications state that these are plea-bargained cases and that he has no right of appeal in either case. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d). The special clerk’s records, filed in this Court on November 15, 2016, in each case, support the trial court’s certifications. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). 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.
