Daniel Morgan Crow v. State
This text of Daniel Morgan Crow v. State (Daniel Morgan Crow v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
DISMISS; Opinion Filed September 21, 2020
In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-20-00222-CR
DANIEL MORGAN CROW, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Court at Law Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019-1-0957
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Nowell, and Evans Opinion by Justice Nowell Daniel Morgan Crow was convicted in the Van Alstyne Municipal Court of
the traffic offense of speeding and assessed a $224 fine. He appealed to Grayson
County Court at Law. Following a de novo trial before the court, appellant was
again convicted and assessed a $100 fine. Appellant then filed a pro se notice of
appeal of the judgment of the Grayson County Court at Law.
The reporter’s record, due April 13, 2020, was not filed. We notified court
reporter Deana West and directed her to file the (1) reporter’s record, (2) written
verification no hearings were recorded, or (3) written verification appellant had not requested the reporter’s record. On April 17, 2020, Ms. West confirmed she reported
the nonjury trial, but that appellant had not requested the reporter’s record. We then
notified appellant by letter dated April 20, 2020 and directed him to provide the
Court with (1) notice that appellant requested preparation of the reporter’s record,
and (2) written verification that he paid or made arrangements to pay the reporter’s
fee documentation or that he had been found to be entitled to proceed without
payment of costs. We cautioned appellant the failure to do so would result in the
appeal being submitted without the reporter’s record. Appellant did not respond, and
we ordered the appeal submitted without the reporter’s record. We also ordered
appellant’s brief filed June 10, 2020. When it was not filed, we directed appellant to
file his brief and an extension motion by June 25, 2020. On August 5, 2020, we
ordered appellant to file his brief by August 17, 2020, cautioning him that the failure
to do so would result in the Court taking whatever action it deemed appropriate,
including dismissing his appeal. Appellant has not responded to the Court’s letters
or orders.
When a case arising in the justice or municipal courts is appealed to the county
court, county criminal court, or county court at law, and the fine imposed by that
court does not exceed $100, this Court lacks jurisdiction “unless the sole issue is the
constitutionality of the statute or ordinance on which the conviction is based.” TEX.
CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 4.03; Montpas v. State, 997 S.W.2d 650, 651 (Tex.
App.––Dallas 1999, no pet.) (quoting article 4.03); Marzett v. State, No. 05–15–
–2– 00147–CR, 2016 WL 1679744, at *1 (Tex. App.––Dallas Apr. 25, 2016, no pet.)
(mem. op., not designated for publication).
The record in this case shows appellant appealed his conviction by the Van
Alstyne Municipal Court to the Grayson County Court at Law, where he was
convicted in a trial de novo and fined $100. Because his fine does not exceed $100,
we would have jurisdiction over his appeal only if he challenged the constitutionality
of a statute or ordinance on which his conviction was based. By not filing a brief
raising a constitutional challenge, appellant has failed to invoke our jurisdiction.
We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
/Erin A. Nowell/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE Do Not Publish TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b) 200222F.U05
–3– Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
DANIEL MORGAN CROW, On Appeal from the County Court at Appellant Law, Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019-1-0957. No. 05-20-00222-CR V. Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell. Justices Myers and Evans THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee participating.
Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Judgment entered this 21st day of September, 2020.
–4–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Daniel Morgan Crow v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-morgan-crow-v-state-texapp-2020.