In the Matter of the Marriage of Malaki Polite Hawkins and Hale Horley Hawkins v. the State of Texas

NUMBER 13-26-00316-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF
MALAKI POLITE HAWKINS AND HALE HORLEY HAWKINS
____________________________________________________________

ON APPEAL FROM THE 480TH DISTRICT COURT
OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS
____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Silva, Peña, and Fonseca
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Silva

This matter is before the Court on appellant Hale Horley Hawkins’s motion for

extension of time to file notice of appeal and motion for extension of time to file brief. 1

On December 4, 2025, the trial court signed a final decree of divorce. On

December 10, 2025, appellant filed a motion for new trial “solely for the purpose of

extending the appellate timetable and is not filed to challenge the substance of the

1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Third Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket

equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV’T CODE § 73.001.
judgment or to request that it be altered or set aside.” On March 9, 2026, appellant filed

a notice of appeal attempting to appeal the divorce decree in trial court cause number 24-

0077-F480. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a). On May 1, 2026, the Clerk of the Court notified

appellant that it appeared that the appeal was not timely perfected. Appellant was advised

that the appeal would be dismissed if the defect was not corrected within ten days from

the date of receipt of the notice. See id. R. 42.3(a), (c). On May 5, 2026, appellant filed a

motion for extension of time to file the appellate brief seeking an additional thirty days.

On May 8, 2026, appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file the notice of appeal.

See id. R. 26.3.

The Court is bound by the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The appellate

court may extend the time to file the notice of appeal if, within fifteen days after the

deadline for filing the notice of appeal, the appellant files the notice of appeal in the trial

court and files in the appellate court a motion for extension of time that complies with the

appellate rules. Id. R. 26.3; see In re K.A.F., 160 S.W.3d 923, 926–27 (Tex. 2005). We

are to construe the rules of appellate procedure reasonably and liberally so that the right

to appeal is not lost by imposing requirements not absolutely necessary to effectuate the

purpose of a rule. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 616–17 (Tex. 1997).

However, we are prohibited from enlarging the scope of our jurisdiction by enlarging the

time for perfecting an appeal in a civil case in a manner not provided for by rule. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 2; In re T.W., 89 S.W.3d 641, 642 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2002, no pet.).

Here, appellant’s notice of appeal was filed on March 9, 2026, within the fifteen-

day grace period. Nonetheless, appellant must provide a reasonable explanation for the

2
late filing, and it is not enough to simply file a notice of appeal. Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d 617;

Woodard v. Higgins, 140 S.W.3d 462, 462 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2004, no pet.); see TEX.

R. APP. P. 26.3 (providing that appellate court may extend time to file notice of appeal if,

within fifteen days of the deadline for filing, appealing party files its notice of appeal and

accompanying motion.). On May 8, 2026, appellant filed a motion for extension of time

providing an explanation for the late filing of the notice of appeal. However, appellant filed

the motion after the fifteen-day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 had expired. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 26.3.

Rule 42.3 permits an appellate court, on its own initiative after giving ten days’

notice to all parties, to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction or for failure to comply

with a requirement of the appellate rules. See id. R. 42.3(a), (c). Because appellant’s

notice of appeal and subsequent motion for extension of time to file notice of appeal was

untimely, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss both motions and

the entire cause for want of jurisdiction. See id. 42.3(a).

CLARISSA SILVA
Justice

Delivered and filed on the
4th day of June, 2026.

3