2008 Ford Fusion VIN 3FAHP02128R153677 v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 25, 2024
• Docket: 05-24-00406-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed November 25, 2024

S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-24-00406-CV

2008 FORD FUSION VIN #3FAHP02128R153677, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 271st District Court Wise County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CV22-09-722

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Pedersen, III, Smith, and Garcia Opinion by Justice Garcia Appellant filed his brief on August 19, 2024. We then notified appellant, who

is proceeding pro se, that his brief failed to comply with rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules

of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. We listed numerous defects in the

brief, including that the brief did not contain a complete list of all parties to the trial

court’s judgment, it did not contain a table of contents with references to the pages

of the brief, the table of contents did not indicate the subject matter of each issue,

the brief does not contain an index of authorities, and neither the statement of the

case nor the statement of facts was supported by record references. Further, the argument section of the brief does not contain any citations to authority or to the

record. We instructed appellant to file an amended brief correcting these

deficiencies within ten days. In the request, we cautioned appellant that the appeal

was subject to dismissal if appellant failed to file an amended brief in compliance

with the rules of appellate procedure. To date, appellant has failed to do so.

The purpose of an appellant’s brief is to acquaint the Court with the issues in

a case and to present argument that will enable us to decide the case. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 38.9. The right to appellate review extends only to complaints made in

accordance with our rules of appellate procedure, which require an appellant to

concisely articulate the issues we are asked to decide, to make clear, concise, and

specific arguments in support of appellant’s position, to cite appropriate authorities,

and to specify the pages in the record where each alleged error can be found. See

Tex. R. App. P. 38.1; Lee v. Abbott, No. 05-18-01185-CV, 2019 WL 1970521, at *1

(Tex. App—Dallas May 3, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.); Bolling v. Farmers Branch

Indep. Sch. Dist., 315 S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App—Dallas 2010, no pet.). Even

liberally construing appellant’s brief, we conclude it fails to acquaint the Court with

the issues in the case, does not enable us to decide the case, does not make clear,

concise, specific arguments supported by legal authority, and is in flagrant violation

of rule 38.

–2– Although given the opportunity to correct the brief, appellant did not do so.

Under these circumstances, we strike appellant’s brief and dismiss this appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a); 42.3(b),(c).

/Dennise Garcia/ DENNISE GARCIA JUSTICE 240406F.P05

–3– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT

2008 FORD FUSION VIN On Appeal from the 271st District #3FAHP02128R153677, Appellant Court, Wise County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CV22-09-722. No. 05-24-00406-CV V. Opinion delivered by Justice Garcia. Justices Pedersen, III and Smith THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

Judgment entered November 25, 2024

–4–