|
|
|
|
Opinion filed December 14, 2006
In The
Eleventh Court of Appeals
__________
No. 11-06-00330-CR
__________
CARROLL WAYNE GONZILAS, Appellant
V.
STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 104th District Court
Taylor County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 15,127-B
O P I N I O N
The trial court convicted Carroll Wayne Gonzilas, upon his plea of guilty, of possession of methamphetamine. Pursuant to the plea bargain agreement, the trial court assessed punishment at confinement for fifteen years. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
The trial court imposed the sentence in open court on April 11, 2005. On November 17, 2006, appellant filed in this court an amended notice of appeal. This is the only notice of appeal this court has received from this conviction, and it is not timely. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2.
The clerk of this court wrote the parties informing them that the November 17 notice of appeal was untimely and directing appellant to respond showing grounds for continuing this appeal. Appellant has responded with a letter in which he contends that he filed a notice of appeal on April 29, 2005; that the trial court has not complied with the terms of the plea bargain agreement; that the trial court=s actions may be void; and that he Awill scrape the white-off [his] Notice Original, so as to Expose the File-Date stamping, and File it with@ this court if it is decided that he has reasonably explained that he did file a notice of appeal or if this Acourt orders it.@ Attached to his letter are copies of the stipulation of evidence signed by appellant on April 11, 2005, and a notice of invalid judgment and motion for a judgment nunc pro tunc signed by appellant on October 27, 2006. Appellant has failed to establish that he timely perfected an appeal from the April 11, 2005 imposition in open court.
Absent a timely notice of appeal or the granting of a timely motion for extension of time, this court does not have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996); Rodarte v. State, 860 S.W.2d 108 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Shute v. State, 744 S.W.2d 96 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). Therefore, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
December 14, 2006
Do not publish. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J,
McCall, J., and Strange, J.