Ex Parte Devan S. Matthews, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 12246

Matthews filed a pretrial habeas corpus application challenging double jeopardy; relief denied by the trial court.
The trial court conducted a hearing and denied Matthews’s habeas relief in a June 16, 2014 order.
After August 26, 2014 findings and conclusions addressing the habeas application, Matthews filed a September 4, 2014 notice of appeal.
Matthews argued timely appeal based on the August 26, 2014 findings; the State argued the notice was untimely.
The court held Matthews’s appellate timetable was not reset because the trial court’s plenary power expired before the August 26, 2014 findings, and no timely post-judgment motion was filed.
The result is dismissal of the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the notice of appeal was timely.	Matthews timely appeal within 30 days of August 26 findings.	No extension valid; plenary power expired before findings.	Untimely; jurisdiction not invoked.
Whether the August 26, 2014 findings extended the appellate timetable.	Findings reset the timetable.	Findings were issued after plenary power expired and do not reset timetable.	Findings did not extend the timetable.
Whether the trial court’s plenary power expiration affected appellate timing.	Court could still issue timely findings within plenary power.	Power expired July 16, 2014; findings void as to timing.	Plenary power expired; findings null and not controlling.

Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (timeliness governs appellate jurisdiction in criminal appeals)
Castillo v. State, 369 S.W.3d 196 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (late notices require extension and grant of extension to be timely)
Greenwell v. Court of Appeals for Thirteenth Judicial Dist., 159 S.W.3d 645 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (pretrial habeas order is immediately appealable; timing runs from order date)
Kelson v. State, 167 S.W.3d 587 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2005) (timetable controls despite lack of notice in civil/criminal contexts)