Reshawn L. Johnson v. State
This text of Reshawn L. Johnson v. State (Reshawn L. Johnson 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.
Opinion
NO. 07-02-00093-CV
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL D
MARCH 19, 2002, ______________________________
RESHAWN L. JOHNSON,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee _________________________________
FROM THE 364TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;
NO. 97-424,513; HON. BRADLEY S. UNDERWOOD, PRESIDING _______________________________
Before BOYD, C.J, QUINN, REAVIS and JOHNSON, J.J.
Reshawn L. Johnson, (Johnson), a current inmate with the Texas Department of
Criminal Justice (TDCJ), filed a notice of appeal on February 21, 2002. However, Johnson
did not pay the $125 filling fee required from appellants pursuant to Texas Rule of
Appellate Procedure 5. Nor did he (at the time he noticed his appeal) file an affidavit
pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1 relieving him of his duty to do so. By
letter from this Court dated February 25, 2002, we informed appellant that “[u]nless the
filing fee in the amount of $125.00 is paid . . . [his] appeal will be subject to dismissal. TEX . R. APP . P. 42.3(c); See Holt v. F. F. Enterprises, 990 S.W.2d 756 (Tex. App.--Amarillo
1998, pet. ref’d.).
In apparent response to our February letter, the court received from Johnson a
document entitled Affidavit of Indigency In Lieu of Cost Bond, wherein he represented that
he was an indigent. Yet, the affidavit does not comport with the requirements of an
affidavit of indigence specified under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1(b). Nor was
it filed within the deadlines set by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1(c)(1)
(establishing the deadline by which one must request leave to proceed as a pauper) and
20.1(c)(3) (establishing the deadline by which one must seek leave to extend the deadline
contemplated under 20.1(c)(1)). Nor was it accompanied by any motion for leave to extend
either of those deadlines. Thus, we conclude that appellant’s Affidavit of Indigency is
ineffective to relieve him from his obligation to pay the aforementioned filing fee.
Due to appellant’s failure to pay the filing fee, we dismiss the appeal pursuant to
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3 (c).
Per Curiam
Do not publish.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Reshawn L. Johnson v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reshawn-l-johnson-v-state-texapp-2002.