NO. 12-08-00053-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT
TYLER, TEXAS
RAY CHARLES MILLER, § APPEAL FROM THE 241ST
APPELLANT
V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
APPELLEE § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
This appeal is being dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant was convicted of intoxication manslaughter, and sentence was imposed on September 12, 2007.
An appeal in a criminal case is perfected when notice of appeal is filed within thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court unless a motion for new trial is timely filed. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1). Where a timely motion for new trial has been filed, notice of appeal shall be filed within ninety days after the sentence is imposed or suspended in open court. Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(2). Appellant did not file a motion for new trial. Therefore, his notice of appeal was due to have been filed on or before October 12, 2007. However, Appellant did not file his notice of appeal until February 4, 2008 and did not file a motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal as permitted by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.3.
On February 6, 2008, this court notified Appellant, pursuant to Rules 26.2 and 37.2, that the clerk’s record did not show the jurisdiction of this court, and it gave him until February 18, 2008 to correct the defect. In response, Appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file a pro se motion for appointed counsel, in which he stated that he filed a notice of appeal on October 9, 2007. However, the trial court clerk has no record of this notice of appeal, and Appellant did not furnish this court a file marked copy of the October 9, 2007 notice of appeal. Therefore, we must conclude that we are without jurisdiction of this appeal.
Because this court has no authority to allow the late filing of a notice of appeal except as provided by Rule 26.3, the appeal must be dismissed. See Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). Accordingly, Appellant’s motion for extension of time to file his pro se motion for appointed counsel is overruled, and the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Opinion delivered February 20, 2008.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.
(DO NOT PUBLISH)