Mark Anthony Vargas v. the State of Texas

NUMBER 13-25-00257-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

MARK ANTHONY VARGAS, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

ON APPEAL FROM THE 329TH DISTRICT COURT
OF WHARTON COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices West and Cron
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Cron

This cause is before the Court on appellant’s motion to accept late notice of appeal

which we construe as a motion for extension of time to file a notice of appeal.

Appellant was sentenced on October 17, 2024, in cause number 23885. On May

8, 2025, appellant filed a late notice of appeal. On May 9, 2025, the Clerk of the Court

notified appellant that it appeared the notice of appeal was not timely filed, and appellant,
had on this same day, filed his extension motion.

However, this Court’s appellate jurisdiction in a criminal case is invoked by a timely

filed notice of appeal. Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Absent

a timely filed notice of appeal, a court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to address the

merits of the appeal and can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal for want of

jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).

Unless a motion for new trial is timely filed, a notice of appeal must be filed within

thirty days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or after the day

the trial court enters an appealable order. TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a)(1). The time within which

to file the notice may be enlarged if, within fifteen days after the deadline for filing the

notice, the party files the notice of appeal and a motion complying with Rule 10.5(b) of

the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See id. 26.3. Appellant’s late notice of appeal,

filed on May 8, 2025, was untimely filed since it was not filed within thirty days after his

sentence was imposed on October 17, 2024, so we lack jurisdiction over the appeal. See

Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file

and appellant’s failure to timely perfect his appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should

be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Appellant may be entitled to an out-of-time appeal

by filing a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal

Appeals; however, the availability of that remedy is beyond the jurisdiction of this Court.

See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 3(a); see also Ex parte Garcia, 988 S.W.2d

240 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). Accordingly, appellant’s motion for extension of time to file a

2
notice of appeal is hereby denied, and the entire appeal is hereby dismissed for want of

jurisdiction. 1

JENNY CRON
Justice

Do not publish.
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on the
22nd day of May, 2025.

1 We observe in an exhibit attached to appellant’s motion (a handwritten letter from appellant to the

trial court filed on April 3, 2025) that appellant indicates he “put in a notice of appeal,” but in his motion
before us he has indicated in a footnote that “the trial court file does not indicate a [n]otice of [a]ppeal was
ever filed.” For this reason, our decision to dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction remains.
3