R. Wayne Johnson v. U.S. Post Master
This text of R. Wayne Johnson v. U.S. Post Master (R. Wayne Johnson v. U.S. Post Master) 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
Opinion issued April 15, 2025
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-24-00886-CV ——————————— R. WAYNE JOHNSON, Appellant V. U.S. POSTMASTER, Appellee
On Appeal from the 458th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 22-DCV-292489
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant R. Wayne Johnson, a pro se inmate, incarcerated in the Texas
Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), appeals from an order of dismissal for want
of prosecution signed on October 17, 2024. On November 12, 2024, appellant filed
a notice of appeal. On January 23, 2025, the Court issued an order advising appellant that his
appeal might be dismissed unless he complied with the requirements of Chapter 14
of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code by February 12, 2025. On February
5, 2025, appellant filed a motion to recuse all nine justices on this Court. On April
1, 2025, the en banc Court issued an order denying the motion to recuse. Because
appellant failed to cure the defects identified in this Court’s January 23, 2025 order,
we dismiss the appeal.
Chapter 14 applies to actions, including appeals and original proceedings,
brought by an inmate in district and county courts, as well as appellate courts, in
which the inmate has filed an affidavit or unsworn declaration of inability to afford
payment of court costs. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 14.002(a). Appellant
filed in the trial court a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, in which he made an
unsworn declaration that he had no property or spouse. When an appellant claims
inability to afford payment of court costs in the trial court, and the trial court did not
overrule this claim, the appellant is not required to pay costs in the trial court or the
appellate court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(b)(1). Having claimed indigence in the
trial court, Chapter 14 applies. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 14.002(a).
Section 14.004 requires an inmate to file and affidavit or unsworn declaration
listing all previous actions he has filed pro se, whether or not he was an inmate at
the time he filed those actions. See id. § 14.004(a)(1). The affidavit or declaration
2 must identify each action and describe the operative facts for which relief was
sought, list the case name, case number, and the court in which it was filed, identify
the party named, and state the result of the action. See id. § 14.004(a)(2). The
affidavit or declaration must be accompanied by a certified copy of the inmate’s trust
account. See id. § 14.004(c). These documents are also required on appeal because
the information may have changed between the time the inmate filed his original suit
and the filing of his notice of appeal. See Douglas v. Moffett, 418 S.W.3d 336, 339–
40 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2013, no pet.).
Although our order of February 12, 2025 advised appellant that he was
required to file this affidavit or declaration and trust account statement, appellant
failed to file any of those documents, as required by section 14.004. Appellant filed
no response to this Court’s order, which gave appellant notice and the opportunity
to cure the failure to file the affidavit or declaration and the trust account statement.
Therefore, this Court may dismiss the appeal for failure to comply with section
14.004. See Douglas, 418 S.W.3d at 341; Brickley v. Wagner, No. 15-24-00067-
CV, 2025 WL 409084, at *2 (15th Dist. Feb. 6, 2025, no pet.) (mem. op.).
We dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f). Any pending
motions are dismissed as moot.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Gunn and Guiney.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
R. Wayne Johnson v. U.S. Post Master, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/r-wayne-johnson-v-us-post-master-texapp-2025.