In the Interest of J.A.C., a Child v. the State of Texas
This text of In the Interest of J.A.C., a Child v. the State of Texas (In the Interest of J.A.C., a Child v. the State of Texas) 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 and Opinion Filed July 18, 2024
S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-23-00717-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF J.A.C., A CHILD
On Appeal from the 255th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-23-03532
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Burns and Justices Molberg and Nowell Opinion by Justice Nowell On March 8, 2024, we 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 it did
not contain proper citations either to the record or to authorities. We instructed
appellant to file an amended brief correcting the deficiencies within ten days. We
later extended the time to file his amended brief. On May 6, 2024, appellant filed
an amended brief addressing some of the deficiencies, but not all. Like appellant’s
initial brief, appellant’s amended brief does not contain any citations to the record.
We are not responsible for searching the record for facts that may be favorable to a party’s position. Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 315 S.W.3d 893, 895
(Tex. App—Dallas 201, no pet.)(citing Fredonia State Bank v. Gen. Am. Life Ins.
Co., 881 S.W.2d 279, 283–284 (Tex. 1994)).
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, 315 S.W.3d at 895.
Even liberally construing appellant’s amended brief, we conclude that it is
wholly inadequate to present any questions for appellate review and is in flagrant
violation of rule 38.1. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1; Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895. Further,
although directed to correct all deficiencies, appellant has failed to do so.
–2– Under these circumstances, we strike appellant’s amended brief and dismiss this
appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.9(a); 42.3(b),(c).
/Erin A. Nowell/ ERIN A. NOWELL 230717F.P05 JUSTICE
–3– S Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
IN THE INTEREST OF J.A.C., A On Appeal from the 255th Judicial CHILD District Court, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-23-03532. No. 05-23-00717-CV Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell. Chief Justice Burns and Justice Molberg participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.
Judgment entered July 18, 2024
–4–
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In the Interest of J.A.C., a Child v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-jac-a-child-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.