In the Interest of H.F., a Child v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: July 18, 2024
• Docket: 05-23-00112-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

DISMISS and Opinion Filed July 18, 2024

S In the Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00112-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF H.F., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 254th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-08-20838

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Pedersen, III, and Carlyle Opinion by Justice Carlyle Appellant filed his brief on November 21, 2023. 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. We listed numerous defects in the brief, including that

it did not contain a table of contents, an index of authority, or a statement of the case

supported by record references. Further, no part of the brief contained any citations

to the record or to any authorities. 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. Appellant filed an amended brief on March 8, 2024. However, like his original

brief, the amended brief has numerous defects including the lack of a table of

contents, an index of authority, and no part of the brief contains citations to the record

or to any authorities.

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 corrected 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, and is in flagrant violation of rule 38.

–2– Under these circumstances, we strike appellant’s brief and amended brief and

dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a); 42.3(b),(c).

/Cory L. Carlyle/ CORY L. CARLYLE JUSTICE 230112F.P05

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

IN THE INTEREST OF H.F., A On Appeal from the 254th Judicial CHILD District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-08-20838. No. 05-23-00112-CV Opinion delivered by Justice Carlyle. Justices Partida-Kipness and Pedersen, III participating.

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

Judgment entered July 18, 2024

–4–