Ex Parte M.A.D. Appeal from 105th District Court of Kleberg County (memorandum opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NUMBER 13-19-00430-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ___________________________________________________________ EX PARTE M.A.D. ____________________________________________________________ On appeal from the 105th District Court of Kleberg County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Hinojosa and Tijerina Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras Appellant, M.A.D., attempted to perfect an appeal from a judgment dismissing her petition for expunction of criminal records for want of prosecution. Judgment in this cause was signed on July 12, 2019. We dismiss for want of jurisdiction. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1 provides that an appeal is perfected when notice of appeal is filed within thirty days after the judgment is signed, unless a motion for new trial is timely filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(1). Where a timely motion for new trial has been filed, notice of appeal shall be filed within ninety days after the judgment is signed. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). 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, 617-18, 619 (1997) (construing the predecessor to Rule 26). However, appellant must provide a reasonable explanation for the late filing: it is not enough to simply file a notice of appeal. Id.; Woodard v. Higgins, 140 S.W.3d 462, 462 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2004, no pet.); In re B.G., 104 S.W.3d 565, 567 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002, no pet.). Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1, appellant’s notice of appeal was due on August 12, 20191, but was not filed until August 20, 2019. On September 10, 2019, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellant was advised that, if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court’s letter, the appeal would be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellant providing a reasonable explanation for the late filing of the notice of appeal. Appellant has filed a motion for extension of time to file a brief and motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant’s failure to timely perfect her appeal, and appellant’s failure to respond to this Court’s notice, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF 1 Because the thirtieth day fell on a Sunday, appellant had until the following Monday, August 12, 2019 to file the notice of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 4.1. 2 JURISDICTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), (c). All pending motions are dismissed as moot. DORI CONTRERAS Chief Justice Delivered and filed the 3rd day of October, 2019. 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.
