Background
Jason Curtis Lambert appealed from the 24th District Court of Jackson County, Texas. On February 2, 2024, the Thirteenth Court of Appeals abated his appeal pending the outcome of a related proceeding, cause number 13-24-00039-CR.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the Thirteenth Court’s judgment in the related appeal on May 21, 2026, and the Thirteenth Court issued its mandate on July 23, 2026. Lambert then moved to dismiss the present appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The court held that Lambert’s motion satisfied Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a). The motion was digitally signed by both Lambert and his counsel, and Lambert attached an unsworn declaration, made under penalty of perjury, confirming that his request to dismiss the appeal was true and correct.
The court reinstated the appeal, granted Lambert’s motion, and dismissed the appeal without addressing its merits. Because the dismissal occurred at Lambert’s request, the court stated that it would not entertain a motion for rehearing.
Key Takeaways
- A criminal appellant may voluntarily dismiss an appeal through a written motion signed by both the appellant and counsel.
- Digital signatures and an attached declaration under penalty of perjury satisfied Rule 42.2(a) in this case.
- The dismissal resolved only the appeal’s procedural status; the court did not rule on the merits.
Why It Matters
The opinion confirms that Texas appellate courts will enforce the signature requirements for voluntary dismissal while accepting properly authenticated digital submissions. Criminal appellate practitioners should ensure that both the client and counsel sign the dismissal request.
The decision also illustrates the finality of an appellant-requested dismissal: the court expressly declined to consider any motion for rehearing after granting Lambert’s request.