in the Matter of M.A.H.

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 10, 1996
Docket10-95-00259-CV
StatusPublished

This text of in the Matter of M.A.H. (in the Matter of M.A.H.) 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.

Bluebook
in the Matter of M.A.H., (Tex. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

In The Matter of M.A.H.


IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS


No. 10-95-259-CV


     IN THE MATTER OF M.A.H.,

                                                                                              Appellant


From the 52nd District Court

Coryell County, Texas

Trial Court # 953


MEMORANDUM OPINION


      On May 16, 1994, the court found that M.H. had committed eleven counts of criminal mischief, indicating a need for supervision, and placed him on probation in the custody of his mother until his seventeenth birthday. After M.H. was accused of aggravated sexual assault, the court modified the disposition to commit him to the custody of the Texas Youth Commission until his twenty-first birthday. M.H. immediately filed a notice of appeal.

      Appeals from juvenile court are governed by the rules applicable to civil appeals generally. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 56.01 (Vernon 1986 & Supp. Pamph. 1996); In re S.D.G., 861 S.W.2d 106 (Tex. App.—Waco 1993, no writ). A notice of appeal does not perfect an appeal in a juvenile case, rather M.H. was required to file a cost bond or an affidavit of inability to pay costs. Tex. R. App. P. 40(a)(1); In re S.D.G., 861 S.W.2d at 106. Because he failed to file either, we do not have jurisdiction over his appeal. Id.

      We are required to allow M.H. an opportunity to amend his notice of appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 83; Linwood v. NCNB Texas, 885 S.W.2d 102, 103 (Tex. 1994). However, M.H. has filed a motion to withdraw his notice of appeal and dismiss this appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 59(a). We conclude that this motion evidences an intent to abandon the appeal. Thus, we will not wait for him to perform an act he has no intention of performing.

      We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

                                                                               PER CURIAM


Before Justice Cummings, and

            Justice Vance

Dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Opinion delivered and filed April 10, 1996

Do not publish

t-size: 12pt">Do not publish

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Linwood v. NCNB Texas
885 S.W.2d 102 (Texas Supreme Court, 1994)
S.D.G., Matter Of
861 S.W.2d 106 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in the Matter of M.A.H., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-mah-texapp-1996.