in the Interest of A.D., a Child

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 8, 2004
• Docket: 10-04-00026-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-04-00026-CV

In the Interest of A.D., a Child

From the 378th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court # 66494D

MEMORANDUM  Opinion

        This appeal concerns a petition to adjudicate the paternity of A.D.  See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 160.201(b)(3) (Vernon 2002).  The trial court dismissed Appellant’s petition.  We will affirm.

      In one issue, Appellant contends that the trial court erred in not ordering that Appellant, who is imprisoned in the Texas Department of Corrections, appear by telephone at the hearing on a motion to dismiss the petition.  Appellant contends that he made three requests that the court order a telephone hearing.  We assume, without deciding, that Appellant’s letters to the court constituted motions to appear by telephone.  See Tex. R. App. P. 33.1(a); e.g., In re J.D.S., 111 S.W.3d 324, 327 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2003, no pet.).  Nonetheless, Appellant’s letters do not state “any factual information showing why his interest in appearing outweighed the impact on the correctional system.”  See In re Z.L.T., 124 S.W.3d 163, 166 (Tex. 2003).  We overrule Appellant’s issue.

      Having overruled Appellant’s sole issue, we affirm the judgment.

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice Reyna

(Justice Vance concurs in the judgment with a note: Z.L.T. involved a bench warrant.  It would appear that the “impact on the correctional system” would be far less when a prisoner is allowed to appear by telephone, as Appellant requested, than when a bench warrant is issued.)

Opinion delivered and filed September 8, 2004

Affirmed

[CV06]