IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL C
MARCH 3, 2005
______________________________
MISTY BELITZ,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
_________________________________
FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF DEAF SMITH COUNTY;
NO. 04-0396; HON. TOM SIMONS, PRESIDING
_______________________________
ON MOTION TO DISMISS
__________________________________
Before JOHNSON, C.J., and QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.
Appellant Misty Belitz, by and through her attorney, has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal because she no longer desires to prosecute it. Without passing on the merits of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(2) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.
Brian Quinn
Justice
Do not publish.
cked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
NO. 07-10-00380-CR; 07-10-00381-CR; 07-10-00382-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL B
OCTOBER 8, 2010
DAVID MATTHEW LAYTON, APPELLANT
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
FROM THE 251ST DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;
NO. 34,435-C, 34,436-C, 34,437-C; HONORABLE ANA ESTEVEZ, JUDGE
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, David Matthew Layton, seeks to appeal orders in each of the above-identified causes denying his requests for post-conviction DNA testing and appointment of counsel. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 64.01, .03, .05 (Vernon Supp. 2010). The orders denying appellants requests were signed on July 12, 2010. The deadline for perfecting the present appeals was, therefore, August 11, 2010. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1).[1] Appellant filed his notices of appeal on September 27, 2010. Under these circumstances, we lack jurisdiction to dispose of the purported appeals in any manner other than by dismissing them for want of jurisdiction. In re Suhre, No. 03-03-00066-CR, 2003 Tex.App. LEXIS 1343, at *1 (Tex.App.Austin Feb. 13, 2003, pet. refd).
Consequently, the appeals are dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Mackey K. Hancock
Justice
Do not publish.
[1] We are aware, as appellant notes in his notice of appeal, that appellant filed a petition for writ of mandamus with this Court relating to the trial courts rulings in these orders on August 9, 2010. However, the filing of a petition for writ of mandamus within the time in which a direct appeal may be perfected does not extend the time in which the direct appeal must be perfected. See id. at 26.2(b).