Tracy Ray Gibson v. State, 12-17-00148-CR

In 2007 Tracy Ray Gibson pleaded guilty to aggravated robbery, felon-in-possession, and theft. He attempted appeals that were dismissed as untimely.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted habeas relief in January 2016, after which Gibson entered a new plea agreement.
The trial court imposed sentence on April 5, 2016; Gibson filed untimely appeals from that 2016 judgment and this Court dismissed them in October 2016 for lack of jurisdiction.
This Court’s mandate issued March 13, 2017. Gibson then filed new notices of appeal in the three cause numbers in May 2017.
The Court notified Gibson that his May 2017 notices failed to show jurisdiction (no new final judgment or appealable order) and gave him time to amend; Gibson argued his conviction was not final until the mandate issued.
The Court held Gibson’s appeals untimely under the appellate rules (30-day/90-day deadlines) and dismissed the appeals for want of jurisdiction, noting further review lies with the Court of Criminal Appeals and trial-court mandate must be enforced.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the May 2017 notices of appeal were timely and conferred jurisdiction	Gibson: conviction wasn’t final until this Court’s mandate issued (March 13, 2017), so his May notices were timely	State: appellate rules required notice within 30 days after sentence (or 90 days if new-trial motion); Gibson missed those deadlines	Court: Notices were untimely; appeals dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Whether the appellate court could reconsider after its mandate issued	Gibson: implied request to revisit post-mandate	State: once mandate issued it must be enforced and further review is with the Court of Criminal Appeals	Court: Mandate must be enforced; further review belongs to the Court of Criminal Appeals

Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (mandate enforcement and limits on appellate court’s jurisdiction once mandate issues)