In the Interest of J.S.B., a Child v. the State of Texas
This text of In the Interest of J.S.B., a Child v. the State of Texas (In the Interest of J.S.B., 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
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
No. 07-23-00308-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF J.S.B., A CHILD
On Appeal from the 251st District Court Randall County, Texas Trial Court No. 63,168C, Honorable Ana Estevez, Presiding
April 30, 2024 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before PARKER and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ.
Appellant, Devin Little Johnson, proceeding pro se, filed this appeal from the trial
court’s order in a suit modifying the parent-child relationship. We affirm the order of the
trial court.
In a prior letter, this Court informed Johnson that her brief failed to comply with the
requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1. We identified deficiencies in
the brief and ordered Johnson to file a corrected brief. Although Johnson has filed an
amended brief, it too fails to conform to Rule 38.1. It does not include a statement of facts supported by references to the appellate record or substantive argument adequately
supported by citations to legal authorities. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1.
While we construe liberally pro se pleadings and briefs, we nonetheless hold pro
se litigants to the same standards as licensed attorneys and require them to comply with
applicable laws and rules of procedure. Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181,
184–85 (Tex. 1978). To present an issue to an appellate court, a party’s brief must,
among other things, present a clear and concise argument for the contentions made with
appropriate citations to authorities and the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(i). Failure to cite
legal authority or provide substantive analysis of the legal issue presented constitutes a
waiver of that issue on appeal. Handy v. 1100 Reinli St. LLC, No. 07-23-00025-CV, 2023
Tex. App. LEXIS 5629, at *4 (Tex. App.—Amarillo July 31, 2023, pet. denied) (mem. op.).
Johnson’s brief does not identify any legal issues presented; rather, the five “issues
presented” consist of copies of two court orders, a copy of Johnson’s apartment lease, a
pay stub, and J.S.B.’s birth certificate. The argument portion of her brief can be
summarized as Johnson’s declaration that she is capable of caring for J.S.B. Her
argument does not provide citation to appropriate authorities or the record, nor does it
assert any error by the trial court. We conclude that Johnson has failed to adequately
brief her complaints and therefore presents nothing for our review. Her issues on appeal
are waived. See id.
We note that in her prayer, Johnson alleges that she “wasn’t notified of the court
hearing of modification on March 2, 2023.” However, March 2, 2023, was the date that
J.S.B.’s paternal grandmother filed a petition to modify the parent-child relationship. The
2 record contains a copy of the officer’s return indicating personal service of the citation
and petition on Johnson on June 15, 2023. The trial court’s final order was signed on
August 2, 2023.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Judy C. Parker Justice
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.S.B., a Child v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-interest-of-jsb-a-child-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.