Hannan Isaac Joseph v. the State of Texas

Opinion filed July 3, 2025

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals
___________

No. 11-25-00141-CR
___________

HANNAN ISAAC JOSEPH, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 259th District Court
Jones County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. CR-027960

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On February 24, 2025, a jury convicted Appellant, Hannan Isaac Joseph, of
driving while intoxicated, a Class B misdemeanor. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN.
§ 49.04(a), (b) (West Supp. 2024). The trial court assessed his punishment at
confinement for 180 days in the Jones County Jail and a $2,000 fine, suspended the
imposition of that sentence, and placed him on community supervision for two years.
On May 16, 2025, Appellant filed a pro se “Petition for Specific Performance,
Injunctive Relief, and to Vacate Judgment Due to [Mistrial],” which we construe as
a notice of appeal from the trial court’s judgment of conviction. In the notice,
Appellant seeks to invoke “the original and appellate jurisdiction” of this court. We
dismiss the appeal.
When this appeal was docketed, we notified Appellant by letter that his pro se
notice of appeal appeared to be untimely. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a). We also
advised Appellant that our authority to exercise original jurisdiction is limited. See
TEX. CONST. art. V, § 6; TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221 (West Supp. 2024). In
our letter, we requested that Appellant respond and show grounds to continue the
appeal, and we notified him that the appeal may be dismissed for want of
jurisdiction. Although we reminded him by letter on May 28 that his response was
due, Appellant did not file a response.
Pursuant to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, a notice of appeal must
be filed either (1) within thirty days after the date that sentence is imposed or
suspended in open court or (2) if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial,
within ninety days after the date that sentence is imposed or suspended in open court.
TEX. R. APP. P. 26.2(a). The judgment of conviction shows that the trial court
sentenced Appellant in open court on February 24, 2025. Appellant mailed his
notice of appeal on May 10, 2025, and it was filed on May 16, 2025. Appellant did
not file a motion for new trial.1 The notice of appeal was therefore untimely. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 9.2(b)(1), 26.2(a)(1). Absent a timely filed notice of appeal, we do
not have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210
(Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522–23 (Tex. Crim. App.
1996); Rodarte v. State, 860 S.W.2d 108, 110 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993).
Moreover, to the extent that Appellant attempts to invoke our original
jurisdiction, we have no authority to grant the relief he seeks. In this regard,

1
Appellant’s notice includes a “motion to vacate the judgment due to mistrial and void jurisdiction”
along with several “causes of action.” To the extent that this part of the filing could be construed as a
motion for new trial, such a motion was untimely filed and improperly submitted to this court. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 21.4(a), 21.6.
2
Appellant requests, among other relief, “[s]pecific performance compelling
fiduciary duties under the trust law agreement and merger,” a “permanent injunction
against threats, interference, or unlawful agreement and merger” and that we vacate
the judgment “based on [mistrial] and misconduct.” As a court of appeals, we have
limited original jurisdiction in criminal cases, which does not apply here. GOV’T
§ 22.221(a), (d); TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.05 (West Supp. 2024)
(original habeas jurisdiction is limited to county courts, district courts, and the Court
of Criminal Appeals); see In re Ayers, 515 S.W.3d 356 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th
Dist.] 2016, orig. proceeding). Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to address
Appellant’s “claims” or to entertain his requests. 2
Because we lack jurisdiction over the merits of this appeal, we have no
jurisdiction to consider Appellant’s “petition.” See Gowan v. State, No. 02-16-
00140-CR, 2016 WL 2989952, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth May 19, 2016, no
pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (“[H]aving no jurisdiction over [the]
appeal, we have no jurisdiction to consider [the appellant’s] motion.”).
We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

W. STACY TROTTER
JUSTICE
July 3, 2025

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,
Trotter, J., and Williams, J.

2
To the extent Appellant requests that we grant him an out-of-time appeal, we are not authorized to
grant such a request. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is the only court with jurisdiction to consider a
motion for an out-of-time appeal. See Ater v. Eighth Ct. of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App.
1991) (orig. proceeding).

3