Full Opinion

NUMBERS 13-26-00326-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG MICHAEL NIEDECKEN, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ON APPEAL FROM THE 423RD DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, TEXAS MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices Cron and Fonseca Memorandum Opinion by Justice Fonseca This cause is before the Court on the State’s motion to dismiss, appellant’s motion for more time to respond to the same, and appellant’s response joining in the request for dismissal. 1 Upon review of the motion, response, and record before us, specifically the 1 This appeal was transferred from the Third Court of Appeals in Austin pursuant to an order issued by the Texas Supreme Court. See TEX. GOV’T CODE § 73.001. We are required to follow the precedent of trial court’s order granting a new trial on punishment, it appears there is no final, appealable order in the case. On March 12, 2026, appellant filed a notice of appeal attempting to appeal a judgment of conviction in trial court case number 17,426. However, it appears that prior to the notice of appeal, the trial court granted appellant’s motion for new trial on punishment on March 10, 2026. Although in criminal cases a prematurely filed notice of appeal simply becomes effective after sentence is imposed or suspended in open court, see TEX. R. APP. P. 27.2, in the interest of judicial economy and at the joint request of the parties, we grant the State’s unopposed motion to dismiss, deny appellant’s motion for more time to file a response as moot, and dismiss the appeal without prejudice. YSMAEL FONSECA Justice Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). Delivered and filed on the 24th day of September, 2026. the transferor court to the extent it differs from our own. TEX. R. APP. P. 41.3. 2