Russell Eugene Galer, II v. Warden Terry

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 20, 2002
• Docket: 10-01-00112-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Galer v. Terry

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-01-112-CV

     RUSSELL EUGENE GALER, II,

                                                                              Appellant

     v.

     WARDEN TERRY,

                                                                              Appellee

From the 87th District Court

Freestone County, Texas

Trial Court # 01-069-B

MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Russell Galer, II, is an inmate. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 14.001 (3) (Vernon Supp. 2002). He filed a “claim” (a civil suit) in the district court of Freestone County. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 14.001 (1) (Vernon Supp. 2002). In connection with the claim he filed an unsworn declaration of the inability to pay cost which substantially complied with the statute. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 14.002 (a) (Vernon Supp. 2002). He refused to file the separate affidavit or declaration required by the statute regarding other cases that he had filed. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 14.004 (Vernon Supp. 2002). The trial court dismissed the case and gave as one of the reasons for the dismissal, Galer’s failure to file the affidavit or declaration regarding other cases which he had filed. Id. Galer appeals, complaining about the rejection of the merits of his claim, but does not address the propriety of the trial court dismissing his claim for failure to file the required affidavit or declaration. Id. Because Galer does not identify and brief any alleged error with regard to the trial court’s dismissal of his claim, Galer presents nothing for our review. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

                                                                         PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice Gray

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed March 20, 2002

Do not publish

[CV06]

eight: 0.388889in">      The trial court properly assessed punishment within the range provided by the laws in effect at the time of the offense. Accord: Wilson v. State, 899 S.W.2d 36, 1995 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1995, no pet.h.); Perry V. State, 902 S.W.2d 162, 163 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, pet. ref'd). Appellant's point is overruled.

      The judgment is affirmed.

                                                                               FRANK G. McDONALD

                                                                               Chief Justice (Retired)

Before Justice Cummings,

      Chief Justice McDonald (Retired)

Opinion delivered and filed February 14, 1996