Whitfield, Ronald Wayne v. State

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 10, 2005

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 10, 2005.

 

In The

 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

 

NO. 14-05-00094-CR

NO. 14-05-00095-CR

____________

 

RONALD DWAYNE WHITFIELD, Appellant

 

V.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

 

On Appeal from the 337th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 525,468 & 528,856

 

 

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N


Appellant=s probation of the sentence in his conviction for theft in cause number 525,468 was revoked and appellant was sentenced to confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for five years on July 26, 1989.  After a plea of guilty, appellant was convicted of the offense of burglary of a motor vehicle with intent to commit theft in cause number 528,856, and on August 11, 1989, appellant was sentenced to confinement for five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice.  No timely notices of appeals were filed.  Appellant did not file his pro se notice of appeal of these convictions until December 30, 2004.  Our record does not reflect that the Court of Criminal Appeals granted appellant leave to file an out-of-time appeals.

A defendant=s notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days after sentence is imposed when the defendant has not filed a motion for new trial.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1).  A notice of appeal which complies with the requirements of Rule 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction.  Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).  If an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal.  Under those circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal.  Id.

In addition, the trial court entered a certification of the defendant=s right to appeal in each case in which the court certified that each is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has no right of appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).  The trial court=s certifications are included in the records on appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).

Accordingly, the appeals are ordered dismissed.

 

PER CURIAM

 

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed February 10, 2005.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Fowler and Frost.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).