Ray Dale Hooks and Shirley Hooks v. Theda Fritz, Individually

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 2, 2003
Docket06-03-00081-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Ray Dale Hooks and Shirley Hooks v. Theda Fritz, Individually (Ray Dale Hooks and Shirley Hooks v. Theda Fritz, Individually) 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
Ray Dale Hooks and Shirley Hooks v. Theda Fritz, Individually, (Tex. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion



In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana



______________________________


No. 06-03-00081-CV
______________________________


RAY DALE HOOKS AND SHIRLEY HOOKS, Appellants


V.


THEDA FRITZ, INDIVIDUALLY, ET AL., Appellees





On Appeal from the 71st Judicial District Court
Harrison County, Texas
Trial Court No. 00-0250





Before Morriss, C.J., Ross and Carter, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Ray Dale Hooks and Shirley Hooks, Appellants, attempt to appeal from a default judgment signed January 8, 2003. Appellants filed a motion for new trial on January 30, 2003, but did not file their notice of appeal until May 9, 2003.

When an appellant files a timely motion for new trial, motion to modify the judgment, motion to reinstate, or request for findings of fact and conclusion of law, the notice of appeal must be filed within ninety days after the date the judgment is signed. See Tex R. App. P. 26.1(a). In the present case, the notice of appeal was due on April 9, 2003, thirty days prior to when they actually filed the notice.

Further, the rule setting a longer timetable for a restricted appeal does not apply to a party who has timely filed a postjudgment motion, as Appellants did in this case. Tex. R. App. P. 30. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was required to be filed within ninety days of the date the judgment was signed by the trial court. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1.

Because the notice of appeal was not filed timely, we are without jurisdiction over this appeal. Id.



We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.



Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice



Date Submitted: July 1, 2003

Date Decided: July 2, 2003



nt-family: Times New Roman"> We addressed this issue in detail in our opinion of this date on Prater's appeal in cause number 06-07-00187-CR. For the reasons stated therein, we likewise conclude that error has not been shown.

We affirm the judgment.



Bailey C. Moseley

Justice



Date Submitted: August 8, 2008

Date Decided: September 15, 2008



Do Not Publish

1. Prater appeals from eight convictions. In cause number 06-07-00187-CR, he appeals from his conviction of indecency with a child (A.C.P.) by sexual contact; in cause numbers 06-07-00188-CR through 06-07-00192-CR, he appeals his convictions of sexual assault of a child (A.C.P.). In each of these cases, Prater was sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment, to run consecutively, and $10,000.00 fines.

Prater appeals his conviction in cause number 06-07-00193-CR of indecency with a child (J.A.P.) by sexual contact. Prater was sentenced in this case to twenty years' imprisonment, to run consecutively, and a $10,000.00 fine.

Prater also appeals his conviction in cause number 06-07-00194-CR of aggravated sexual assault of a child (T.L.P.). He was sentenced to life imprisonment, to run consecutively, and a $10,000.00 fine.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ray Dale Hooks and Shirley Hooks v. Theda Fritz, Individually, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ray-dale-hooks-and-shirley-hooks-v-theda-fritz-ind-texapp-2003.