Daniel Moore v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 54th District Court of McLennan County

State: Texas

Court: Texas Northern District Court

Docket No: 10-98-00304-CR

Case Date: 10/28/1998

Plaintiff: Daniel Moore

Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from 54th District Court of McLennan County

Preview:Daniel Moore v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 54th
District Court of McLennan County
Daniel Moore v. The State of Texas /**/
IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-98-304-CR
DANIEL MOORE,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
From the 54th District Court
McLennan County, Texas
Trial Court # 97-898-C
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On August 12, 1998, the appellant, Daniel Moore, pled guilty to the sexual assault of J.F., a second degree felony. See
Tex. Pen. Code Ann. 22.011 (Vernon 1994 & Supp. 1998). The trial court assessed the agreed punishment of 5 years
incarceration in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, probated for 10 years, and a
fine of $2,000. See id. 12.33 (Vernon 1994). Moore filed a general notice of appeal within the requisite time period.
See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1) (notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after the day sentence is imposed or
suspended in open court). However, we conclude that a general notice of appeal is insufficient to invoke our
jurisdiction over this cause and dismiss for want of jurisdiction.
For a notice of appeal to be sufficient when an appeal is sought from a plea bargain agreement, the notice must:
(A)specify that the appeal is for a jurisdictional defect;
(B)specify that the substance of the appeal was raised by written motion and ruled on before trial; or
(C)state that the trial court granted permission to appeal.
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/2850.html[8/20/2013 7:12:50 PM]

Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(3).
Moore filed a general notice of appeal from a judgment based on a negotiated plea agreement. We sent Moore a letter
on September 30, 1998, informing him that his notice of appeal appeared to be defective and that his case was subject
to dismissal for want of jurisdiction if grounds were not shown for continuing the appeal within 10 days from the date
of the letter. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3. Those 10 days have passed, and we have received no correspondence
from Moore. Consequently, we must conclude that Moore s general notice of appeal did not confer jurisdiction on this
court and dismiss the cause for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
Before Chief Justice Davis,
Justice Cummings, and
Justice Vance
Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Opinion delivered and filed October 28, 1998
Do not publish
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/opinions/PDFs1/2850.html[8/20/2013 7:12:50 PM]

Download 2850.pdf