Edwards, Gentle M. v. State

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 29, 2004 Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 29, 2004. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________ NOS. 14-03-01381-CR; 14-03-01382-CR; 14-03-01383-CR 14-03-01384-CR; 14-03-01385-CR; and 14-03-01386-CR ____________ GENTLE M. EDWARDS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 11 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause Nos. 5366, 5367, 5368, 5369, 5370 & 5371 M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N Appellant was convicted by a jury in municipal court of six violations of City of Houston Municipal Ordinances concerning operation of his automobile salvage business. Appellant appealed his convictions to county court. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.17 (Vernon Supp. 2004). The county criminal court determined that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeals and dismissed them. Appellant then appealed to this court. We dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction. Harris County Criminal Court at Law No. 11 signed its order dismissing all these appeals on July 21, 2003. Appellant filed a motion to reconsider on July 28, 2003. On November 21, 2003, the trial court signed an order denying appellant=s motion for rehearing. Appellant filed a single notice of appeal for all of these cases on December 8, 2003. We lack jurisdiction over these appeals. Appellant=s notice of appeal from the county criminal court=s order is untimely. The rules of appellate procedure do not apply to county criminal courts, even when that court exercises limited appellate jurisdiction pursuant to Code of Criminal Procedure article 44.17. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.17 (Vernon Supp. 2004); Carson v. State, 65 S.W.3d 774, 778 (Tex. App.CFort Worth 2001, no pet.); Tweedie v. State, 10 S.W.3d 346, 348 (Tex. App.CDallas 1998, no pet.). The rules of appellate procedure governing the timeliness for perfecting an appeal to this court do apply to an appeal following a county criminal court=s decision under article 44.17, however. Carson, 65 S.W.3d at 778. An appellant desiring to perfect an appeal to this court from a county criminal court=s decision in an article 44.17 appeal must comply, like any other appellant, with the rules of appellate procedure necessary to properly trigger this court=s jurisdiction. Id. A defendant=s notice of appeal is due ninety days after sentence is imposed or an appealable order is signed when the defendant has filed a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(2). 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 and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. Id. Here, appellant=s notice of appeal was due by October 20, 2004, the Monday following ninety days after the trial court signed the order of dismissal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(2) and 4.1(extending last day of filing period to the next day when the deadline is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday). Instead, appellant filed his notice of appeal on December 8, 2003, within thirty days of the county criminal court=s signing of the order denying his motion for rehearing on November 21, 2003. The appellate timetables for appeals to this court are calculated from the date of sentencing or signing of the appealable order, not the overruling of a motion for new trial or rehearing. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2. Appellant=s notice of appeal from the county criminal court at law=s dismissal order was not filed timely. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals for want of jurisdiction. PER CURIAM Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed April 29, 2004. Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Frost and Guzman. Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).