Full Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-26-00758-CR Ex parte Christopher John Webster FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF BELL COUNTY NO. MR2C1707035, THE HONORABLE REBECCA DEPEW, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Christopher John Webster filed an application for writ of habeas corpus challenging his misdemeanor conviction for prostitution. See Tex. Penal Code § 43.02(a); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.09. The trial court denied Webster’s application on March 13, 2026. Consequently, the deadline for Webster to perfect an appeal was April 13, 2026. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.2(a)(1); Ex parte Rios, No. 13-16-00341-CR, 2016 WL 4578930, at *1 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg Sep. 2, 2016, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (“The time to perfect an appeal from an order in a habeas proceeding is governed by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.2.”). He filed a pro se notice of appeal on May 18, 2026. Because Webster’s notice of appeal was untimely, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal and have no recourse but to dismiss it. See Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (explaining that “[a] notice of appeal which complies with the requirements of Tex. R. App. P. 26 is essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction” and that if 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”).1 Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Ex parte Frederiksen, No. 03-17-00332-CR, 2017 WL 2856458, at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin June 30, 2017, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication).2 __________________________________________ Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Theofanis Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction Filed: October 2, 2026 Do Not Publish 1 On May 18, 2026, the date that Webster filed his notice of appeal, he also filed a “motion for extension,” in which he stated that he had only “recently learned” of the denial after contacting the trial court and that he “acted diligently and in good faith to pursue appellate remedies and protect his rights.” We note, however, that “being unaware of an appealable order or judgment does not excuse an untimely notice of appeal in a criminal case.” Ex parte Frederiksen, No. 03-17-00332-CR, 2017 WL 2856458, at *1 n.1 (Tex. App.—Austin June 30, 2017, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (citing Dewalt v. State, 417 S.W.3d 678, 689–90 (Tex. App.—Austin 2013, pet. ref’d)). 2 All pending motions are dismissed as moot. 2