John B. Gordon v. the State of Texas

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-25-00618-CR

John B. Gordon, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY
NO. 25-02978-2, THE HONORABLE LAURA B. BARKER, JUDGE PRESIDING

MEMORANDUM OPINION

A jury empaneled by the Municipal Court for the City of Round Rock found

appellant John B. Gordon guilty of violating a municipal zoning ordinance by constructing an

accessory building without the necessary permit. See Round Rock, Tex., Code of Ordinances,

art. X, § 8-102 (2018) (adopting International Building Code); see also International Code

Council, Inc., Int’l Bldg. Code § 105.1 (2015 ed.) (governing required building permits). In

accordance with the jury’s verdict, the municipal court ordered Gordon to pay a $500 fine and

court costs.

Gordon attempted to appeal the judgment of conviction to the county court at law

and filed an appeal bond with the municipal court on April 22, 2025—fourteen days after the

judgment was entered. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 45A.202(a) (providing that appeal from

municipal court “shall be heard by the county court”), .203(a)(2) (“An appeal is perfected when
the appeal bond has been filed . . . not later than the 10th day after the date the judgment was

entered.”). Because the appeal bond was untimely, the county court at law granted the State’s

plea to the jurisdiction and motion to dismiss Gordon’s appeal and remanded the case to the

municipal court to execute his sentence, see id. art. 45A.203(b) (“If an appeal bond is not timely

filed, the appellate court does not have jurisdiction over the case and shall remand the case to the

justice or municipal court for execution of the sentence.”). Gordon, acting pro se, appeals the

county court at law’s order dismissing his appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Neither the United States nor Texas Constitution guarantees the right to appeal in

a criminal case; the right is statutory. Griffin v. State, 145 S.W.3d 645, 646 (Tex. Crim. App.

2004). “And, to the extent that the legislature has created such a right, one hoping to invoke it

must abide by the statutory requirements creating it.” Ford v. State, 20 S.W.3d 777, 779 (Tex.

App.—Amarillo 2000, no pet.). Gordon’s failure to file the appeal bond within ten days

deprived the county court at law of jurisdiction and left it with no choice but to remand the case

for execution of the sentence. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 45A.203(a)(2), (b).

Because the county court at law dismissed Gordon’s appeal for want of

jurisdiction, we likewise lack jurisdiction to consider the merits of the appeal. See Slaton

v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (explaining that if appeal is not timely

perfected, court of appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address merits of appeal and can take

no action other than to dismiss appeal); Gant v. Abbott, 574 S.W.3d 625, 630 (Tex. App.—

Austin 2019, no pet.) (“Our jurisdiction over the merits of this case extends no further than the

jurisdiction possessed by the district court.” (citing Pearson v. State, 315 S.W.2d 935, 938 (Tex.

1958)); see also Flores v. State, 462 S.W.3d 551, 552 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2015, no

pet.) (concluding that court of appeals lacked jurisdiction to review defendant’s municipal court

2
judgment because county criminal court dismissed his appeal); Texas Vital Care v. State,

323 S.W.3d 609, 611 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2010, no pet.) (determining that court of appeals

lacked jurisdiction to consider appeal after county court dismissed appeal from municipal court

for failure to pay appeal bond).

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P.

43.2(f); Slaton, 981 S.W.2d at 210.

__________________________________________
Rosa Lopez Theofanis, Justice

Before Justices Triana, Kelly, and Theofanis

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: October 9, 2025

Do Not Publish

3