JAC-0018-0779 Nonprecedential Dismissed Processed

State in the Interest of T.J.S.

Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit · Filed November 7, 2018

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

Opinion text

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

JAC 18-779

STATE IN THE INTEREST OF

T.J.S.

**********

APPEAL FROM THE
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, NO. JC2016796
HONORABLE THOMAS R. DUPLANTIER, DISTRICT JUDGE

**********

ELIZABETH A. PICKETT

JUDGE

**********

Court composed of Elizabeth A. Pickett, Phyllis M. Keaty, and Candyce G. Perret,
Judges.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

F.J.S.
In Proper Person
100 13th Street
Lafayette, LA 70501
(337) 335-7490
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT:
F.J.S.

Shytishia A. M. Flugence
Flugence Law Firm
620 S. E. Evangeline Thruway
Lafayette, LA 70509-0381
(337) 261-1099
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT:
F.J.S

Nicole M. Guidry
Attorney at Law
100 South Louisiana Street, Suite 500
Abbeville, LA 70510
(337) 740-2149
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
L.M.B.

Franchesca L. Hamilton-Acker
Acadiana Legal Service Corporation
Post Office Box 4823
Lafayette, LA 70502-4823
(337) 237-4320
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
T.J.S.

Tracey Davenport-McGraw
Assistant District Attorney
Fifteenth Judicial District Court
Post Office Box 3306
Lafayette, LA 70502
(337) 232-5170
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
State of Louisiana

Chantel Conrad
825 Kaliste Saloom Road
Brandywine Building 3, Suite 150
Lafayette, LA 70508
(337) 262-2250
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
State of Louisiana, Department of Children and Family Services

Claudelle Ancar
c/o CWS III, Case Worker
825 Kaliste Saloom Road
Brandywine Building 3, Suite 150
Lafayette, LA 70508
(337) 261-5901
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
State of Louisiana, Department of Children and Family Services

CASA Coordinator
c/o CASA of South Louisiana
227 La Rue France
Lafayette, LA 70508
(337) 268-5111
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
CASA of South Louisiana

PICKETT, Judge.

This court, on its own motion, issued a rule to Appellant, F.J.S., to show

cause why the appeal in the above captioned case should not be dismissed as

untimely. La.Ch.Code art. 332. Appellant did not respond to the rule. For the

reasons that follow, we hereby dismiss the appeal.

On March 27, 2018, the parental rights of Appellant and L.M.B., in regard to

their minor child, T.J.S., were permanently and irrevocably terminated. A written

judgment was signed by the trial court on April 20, 2018.

Pursuant to La.Ch.Code art. 332, “appeals shall be taken within fifteen days

from the mailing of notice of the judgment.” The notice of judgment of the

Termination of Parental Rights and Certification for Adoption, the ruling Appellant

seeks to appeal in this case, was mailed to the parties on April 23, 2018. The delay

for filing a motion for appeal expired on May 8, 2018. Appellant’s pro se “Petition

for Devolutive Appeal” is stamped by the clerk’s office as filed on May 9, 2018;

thus, we find that the appeal was filed untimely.

In Seaman v. Seaman, 10-1295, p. 6 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/15/10), 54 So.3d

756, 760 (citation omitted), this court noted:

While this court is not unmindful of the possible disadvantages
facing a non-attorney attempting self-representation . . . the
jurisprudence is clear that even if the parties to the action do not
oppose the untimely appeal, neither the trial court nor the appellate
court has the authority to extend the delays for seeking an appeal since
the timeliness of an appeal is a jurisdictional issue. . . . Accordingly,
we cannot extend the delay that the plaintiff had to perfect her appeal
in this matter.

Since we find that Appellant did not file an appeal within the delay set forth

in La.Ch.Code art. 332, this appeal must be dismissed as untimely. We hereby

dismiss the appeal.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION.
Rule 2-16.3 Uniform Rules, Court of Appeal.

2