Reeves v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division

Texas Supreme Court

Reeves v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division

964 S.W.2d 290, 41 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 575, 1998 Tex. LEXIS 43

Texas Supreme Court·Decided March 19, 1998·No. No. 97-0400·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinions

HECHT, Justice,

delivered the opinion of the Court,

in which PHILLIPS, Chief Justice, GONZALEZ, SPECTOR and OWEN, Justices, join.

Petitioner timely perfected his appeal, but the transcript was filed thirteen days late, and petitioner did not file a motion to extend the time for filing the transcript within the fifteen-day period prescribed by former Rule 54(c), Tex.R.App. P. Consequently, the court of appeals dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction. For the reasons explained in today’s opinion in Miller v. Metro Health Foundation, 1998 WL 124540, — S.W.2d - (Tex.1998), without hearing oral argument, the Court grants petitioner’s application for writ of error, reverses the judgment of the court of appeals, and remands the case to that court to determine whether petitioner can reasonably explain the need to extend the time for filing the transcript, and if so, to proceed to consider the appeal. Tex.R.App. P. 59.1

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

HECHT, Justice,

delivered the opinion of the Court,

in which PHILLIPS, Chief Justice, GONZALEZ, SPECTOR and OWEN, Justices, join.

Petitioner timely perfected his appeal, but the transcript was filed thirteen days late, and petitioner did not file a motion to extend the time for filing the transcript within the fifteen-day period prescribed by former Rule 54(c), Tex.R.App. P. Consequently, the court of appeals dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction. For the reasons explained in today’s opinion in Miller v. Metro Health Foundation, 1998 WL 124540, — S.W.2d - (Tex.1998), without hearing oral argument, the Court grants petitioner’s application for writ of error, reverses the judgment of the court of appeals, and remands the case to that court to determine whether petitioner can reasonably explain the need to extend the time for filing the transcript, and if so, to proceed to consider the appeal. Tex.R.App. P. 59.1

Reeves v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, 964 S.W.2d 290, 41 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 575, 1998 Tex. LEXIS 43 (Tex. 1998).

Pincite

964 S.W.2d 290 (Reeves v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related