Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Xavier Lee Jimenez filed two pro se notices of appeal on July 24, 2026. One challenged an April 6, 2018 judgment adjudicating his guilt after the revocation of community supervision for first-degree felony possession with intent to deliver between four and 200 grams of a penalty-group-one controlled substance.
The other challenged an April 17, 2018 judgment, rendered pursuant to a plea agreement, convicting Jimenez of first-degree felony possession of between 200 and 400 grams of a penalty-group-one controlled substance. Jimenez filed both notices more than eight years after the trial court sentenced him in open court.
The Court’s Holding
The Fourth Court of Appeals held that it lacked jurisdiction because Jimenez did not timely perfect either appeal. Under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.2(a), a criminal defendant generally must file a notice of appeal within 30 days after sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or within 90 days if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial.
Because the notices were filed more than eight years after sentencing, the court dismissed both appeals for want of jurisdiction. It noted that Jimenez may be able to seek an out-of-time appeal by filing a postconviction application for a writ of habeas corpus with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals under article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
Key Takeaways
- A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke a Texas appellate court’s jurisdiction in a criminal case.
- The ordinary deadline is 30 days after sentencing in open court, extended to 90 days when a timely motion for new trial is filed.
- The court dismissed both appeals but identified an article 11.07 postconviction habeas application as a possible route to seek an out-of-time appeal.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that an appellate court cannot reach the merits of a criminal appeal when the notice of appeal is filed outside the applicable deadline. Here, the passage of more than eight years required dismissal of both appeals for lack of jurisdiction.
The opinion also distinguishes a direct appeal from the separate postconviction process through which Jimenez may seek permission for an out-of-time appeal.