MICHAEL FLORES, JR. v. THE STATE OF TEXAS--Appeal from 148th District Court of Nueces County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-08-00187-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ______________________________________________________________ MICHAEL FLORES, JR., Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. _____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 148th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ______________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Yañez and Rodriguez Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, Michael Flores, Jr., attempted to perfect an appeal from a conviction for intoxication assault. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. This Court's appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a timely filed notice of appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Absent a timely filed notice of appeal, a court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). On April 10, 2008, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that it appeared that the appeal was not timely perfected and that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of the Court s directive. Appellant has not filed a response to the Court s directive. We also note that the certification of appellant s right to appeal fails to reflect that appellant has the right to appeal. See TEX . R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Appellant s notice of appeal was untimely, and accordingly, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal. See Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210. Appellant may be entitled to an out-of-time appeal by filing a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals; however, the availability of that remedy is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court. See TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC . ANN . art. 11.07, § 3(a) (Vernon 2005); see also Ex parte Garcia, 988 S.W.2d 240 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). The appeal is DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. PER CURIAM Do not publish. See TEX . R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed this the 17th day of July, 2008. 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.
