$4,000.00 U.S. Currency v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: December 30, 2004
• Docket: 13-03-00147-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

NUMBER 13-03-147-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________________

$4,000 U.S. CURRENCY,                                                  Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                      Appellee.

____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 130th District Court

of Matagorda County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Hinojosa, Yañez, and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

         Appellant, Brandon Burnett, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 130th District Court of Matagorda County, Texas, in cause number 01-E-0732-C. The clerk’s record was filed on April 1, 2003. The reporter’s record was filed on May 9, 2003. Appellant’s brief was due on June 9, 2003. To date, no appellate brief has been received.

         When the appellant has failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant’s failure to timely file a brief. Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).

         On June 9, 2004, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief. To date, no response has been received from appellant. Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

         The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant’s failure to file an appellate brief or respond to this Court’s notice, and appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. Appellee’s motion is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

                                                               PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 30^th day of December, 2004.