Ernest Benjamin Harden, Jr. v. State of Texas--Appeal from 379th Judicial District Court of Bexar County

No. 04-00-00421-CR
Ernest Benjamin HARDEN, Jr.,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 379th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 1999-CR-3396
Honorable Bert Richardson, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Justice

Paul W. Green, Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Delivered and Filed: May 23, 2001

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Ernest Benjamin Harden, Jr. ("Harden") filed a general notice of appeal to complain of his felony conviction based on a plea of guilty. The punishment assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by Harden. To invoke the court's jurisdiction over this appeal, rule 25.2(b)(3) requires that the notice of appeal specify that the appeal is from a jurisdictional defect, specify that the substance of the appeals was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial, or state that the trial court granted permission to appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b)(3). Because Harden's general notice of appeal did not meet any of the requirements of rule 25.2(b)(3), this court only has jurisdiction to consider issues relating to the trial court's jurisdiction. See Cooper v. State, No. 1100-99, 2001 WL 321579 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 4, 2001); Martinez v. State, 5 S.W.3d 722, 724-25 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1999, no pet.).

Given the jurisdictional limits on Harden's appeal, we ordered appellate counsel to submit a letter identifying the issues to be raised on appeal and explaining how this court had jurisdiction to consider those issues. Appellate counsel failed to respond. The record fails to demonstrate that an issue exists relating to the trial court's jurisdiction. Because the appeal does not raise any issues that this court has jurisdiction to consider, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH