Full Opinion

In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________ No. 02-26-00260-CR ___________________________ DARIUS NIGEL SAULS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS On Appeal from the 371st District Court Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1778885 Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Darius Nigel Sauls, acting pro se, attempts to appeal the trial court’s May 12, 2026 judgment adjudicating him guilty of possession of less than one gram of cocaine. See Tex. Health & Safety Code § 481.115(b). Because Sauls did not file a motion for new trial, his notice of appeal was due June 11, 2026. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1) (providing that a defendant’s notice of appeal must be filed “within 30 days after the day sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, or after the day the trial court enters an appealable order”). Sauls’s notice of appeal, however, was not filed until July 6, 2026, making it untimely. See id. On July 8, 2026, we notified Sauls by letter of our concern that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because his notice of appeal was untimely. We requested that, on or before July 20, 2026, Sauls (1) advise whether he properly addressed, stamped, and mailed the notice of appeal by United States Postal Service to the proper trial court clerk on or before June 11, 2026, and (2) provide evidence of proof of mailing. See Tex. R. App. P. 1.1, 9.2(b). We warned Sauls that if we determined that the appeal was not timely perfected, we would dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f). Sauls has not complied with our request or otherwise filed a response to our jurisdiction letter. A timely notice of appeal is essential to vest this court with jurisdiction. See Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522–23 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Accordingly, because 2 Sauls’s notice of appeal was untimely, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.1 See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1), 43.2(f); Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522–23; Carmichael v. State, No. 02-25-00429-CR, 2026 WL 179568, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 22, 2026, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (dismissing appeal for want of jurisdiction when appellant’s notice of appeal was untimely and he did not comply with appellate court’s request to advise whether he had properly addressed, stamped, or mailed his notice of appeal by United States Postal Service to the proper trial court clerk prior to the applicable deadline). /s/ Brian Walker Brian Walker Justice Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) Delivered: September 3, 2926 1 We may extend the jurisdictional deadline if a notice of appeal is filed in the trial court within fifteen days of its due date, and within that same period, the appellant also files a motion for extension of time complying with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.5(b). See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3; Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522; see also Tex. R. App. P. 10.5(b). Here, however, Sauls has not filed a motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal. But even if he had done so, his notice of appeal would still be untimely because it was filed more than fifteen days after its due date. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3; Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 522. 3