Nelson v. State

562 S.W.2d 919, 1978 Tex. App. LEXIS 2957
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 22, 1978
DocketNo. 12741
StatusPublished

This text of 562 S.W.2d 919 (Nelson v. State) 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
Nelson v. State, 562 S.W.2d 919, 1978 Tex. App. LEXIS 2957 (Tex. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

O’QUINN, Justice.

Appeal in this case is from judgment of the County Court of Travis County, entered upon findings of a jury, committing appellant as a patient for observation and treatment in Austin State Hospital for an indefinite time.

The attorney ad litem appointed by the trial court represented appellant at the hearing and brings this appeal. The brief in behalf of appellant fails to include any [920]*920point of error upon which appellant relies on appeal. Both appellant and appellee through counsel in the briefs request this Court to “review the record herein in the interests of justice.”

By joint motion, granted by this Court from the bench on the date set for oral argument and submission, the parties waived oral argument.

Rule 418(d), Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, requires of the brief for appellant: “A statement of the points upon which the appeal is predicated shall be stated in short form without argument and be separately numbered.” (As amended, effective January 1, 1978).

It is settled that a point of error is an indispensable part of a brief on appeal. When the brief for appellant does not embrace any point of error, and no fundamental error appears in the record, the brief presents nothing for the appellate court to review, and the appeal is not entitled to consideration. Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Inc. v. Tetens, 538 S.W.2d 224, 225 (Tex.Civ.App.Austin 1976, no writ) and authorities there cited.

We have examined the record and find no fundamental error and no ground for reversal or modification of the trial court’s judgment. We deem it proper to affirm the judgment.

Judgment of the trial court, committing appellant as a patient for observation and treatment in Austin State Hospital for an indefinite period, is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Inc. v. Tetens
538 S.W.2d 224 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
562 S.W.2d 919, 1978 Tex. App. LEXIS 2957, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-v-state-texapp-1978.