Lance Davis v. The State of Texas

No. 08-25-00241-CR · Court of Appeals for the Eighth District of Texas at El Paso · April 1, 2026 · No. 08-25-00241-CR

Summary

The Eighth District Court of Appeals of Texas dismissed Lance Davis’s appeal for want of jurisdiction because his notice of appeal from the El Paso Municipal Court of Appeals was filed well after the applicable 30-day deadline. The court held that the later order issued by the Municipal Court of Appeals was void because that court’s plenary power had expired. All pending motions were dismissed as moot.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth District of Texas at El Paso
Writing for the Court
Maria Salas Mendoza, Chief Justice; Palafox, Justice; Soto, Justice
Jurisdiction
Court of Appeals for the Eighth District of Texas
Decision date
April 1, 2026
Docket number
08-25-00241-CR
Procedural posture
Davis appealed to the Texas Court of Appeals for the Eighth District from proceedings involving the El Paso Municipal Court of Appeals. The court questioned its jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was filed outside the statutory deadline.
Standard of review
The court independently determined whether it had subject-matter jurisdiction to consider the appeal.
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Parties
Lance Davis v. The State of Texas
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

appellate jurisdictionappellate procedurefinal judgment rulemunicipal lawcriminal procedure

Practice areas

Texas appellate proceduremunicipal court appealscriminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Court of Appeals had jurisdiction over an appeal from the El Paso Municipal Court of Appeals when the notice of appeal was filed well after the thirty-day deadline.
  2. Whether the El Paso Municipal Court of Appeals's September 23, 2025 order could serve as an appealable order after that court's plenary power had expired.

Holdings

  1. A statutory right to appeal from a municipal court of appeals judgment must be timely invoked by filing a notice of appeal within thirty days after the appealable order is entered; an untimely notice does not invoke the court of appeals's jurisdiction, and the appeal must be dismissed.
  2. The September 23, 2025 order of the El Paso Municipal Court of Appeals was void because it was issued after that court's plenary power had expired.

Key quotations

A court of appeals always has jurisdiction to determine its jurisdiction, and “may always address jurisdictional matters before reaching the merits of an appeal.” (at 2)
The notice of appeal did not invoke this Court’s jurisdiction, and we must dismiss the appeal. (at 4)
Because the September Order was issued eight months after the Municipal Court of Appeals’ plenary power expired, it is void. (at 4)

Factual background

Davis was cited on March 1, 2024, for speeding in a school zone. The Municipal Court found him guilty on August 20, 2024, and assessed a $199.75 fine. The El Paso Municipal Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment on November 20, 2024, but Davis did not file his notice of appeal in the court of appeals until October 6, 2025.

Procedural history

Davis was convicted of speeding in a school zone in the El Paso Municipal Court and fined $199.75. The El Paso Municipal Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment on November 20, 2024. Davis later filed a document construed by that court as a motion to dismiss, which was denied on September 23, 2025, and then filed a notice of appeal in the court of appeals on October 6, 2025. The court held that the notice was untimely, that the September 23 order was void because the municipal appellate court's plenary power had expired, and dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…