You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

William Thomas Watts v. State

Citation: Not availableDocket: 03-08-00725-CR

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; February 23, 2009; Texas; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

William Thomas Watts was found guilty of aggravated sexual assault of a child on July 15, 2008, following a bench trial in the 119th Judicial District Court of Concho County, resulting in a fifty-year sentence. The formal judgment was signed on July 17, 2008. Watts filed a timely motion for a new trial on August 12, which was automatically overruled on September 29, 2008. The notice of appeal was due by October 13, 2008, but Watts mailed it on October 28 and it was filed on October 30, making it untimely. However, since the notice was mailed within fifteen days after it was due, he can seek an extension of time under rule 26.3 by filing a motion that complies with rule 10.5(b), which must be submitted by March 6, 2009. The order is filed by Chief Justice Jones and Justices Puryear and Henson on February 24, 2009.

Legal Issues Addressed

Aggravated Sexual Assault of a Child

Application: The defendant, William Thomas Watts, was convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a child, resulting in a fifty-year sentence.

Reasoning: William Thomas Watts was found guilty of aggravated sexual assault of a child on July 15, 2008, following a bench trial in the 119th Judicial District Court of Concho County, resulting in a fifty-year sentence.

Automatic Overruling of Motion for New Trial

Application: The defendant's motion for a new trial was automatically overruled when not ruled upon by the trial court within the prescribed time frame.

Reasoning: Watts filed a timely motion for a new trial on August 12, which was automatically overruled on September 29, 2008.

Timeliness of Notice of Appeal

Application: The defendant's notice of appeal was filed late, but since it was mailed within fifteen days after it was due, he is eligible to seek an extension under rule 26.3.

Reasoning: The notice of appeal was due by October 13, 2008, but Watts mailed it on October 28 and it was filed on October 30, making it untimely. However, since the notice was mailed within fifteen days after it was due, he can seek an extension of time under rule 26.3 by filing a motion that complies with rule 10.5(b), which must be submitted by March 6, 2009.