In the Interest of A.R.E., a Child Appeal from 225th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-14-00593-CV IN THE INTEREST OF A.R.E., a Child From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013-PA-01424 Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Karen Angelini, Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Delivered and Filed: September 24, 2014 DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION This is an accelerated appeal of the trial court s order terminating appellant s parental rights. The trial court signed the order on July 3, 2014. Accordingly, appellant s notice of appeal was due to be filed on July 23, 2014. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(b). A motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal was due on August 7, 2014. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.3. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on August 15, 2014. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by Rule 26.1 but within the fifteen-day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). But once the period 04-14-00593-CV for granting a motion for extension of time under Rule [26.3] has passed, a party can no longer invoke the appellate court s jurisdiction. Id. Because it did not appear to this court that we had jurisdiction to consider this appeal, we ordered appellant to show cause in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant s court-appointed attorney filed a written response agreeing that this court lacks appellate jurisdiction over the appeal. Because appellant s notice of appeal was not timely filed, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See id. PER CURIAM -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.