Williams, Bobby v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 2, 2015
• Docket: PD-1139-15
• Status: Published

Opinion

RECEIVED / AUG 2 8 2015 COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DffiSBSffigy^g 'debrasp^w* Uy$7 c^itfii±JAL-_Ar fto\t^ .£!>- uznJ' 7gVAT

/! /ANV-S

\ vs •

i MbT/6/J FOR /zVTgr^Si^ 6P VMdT Caq^TOF G£.,r^ /JAL APFzrA L f A f Avien <0 TZTX AT" TO

%TM£ //oMw^A'SUr 0>d/sT OF /^PPetNlx:

li C^/my/viArU CA*sr Mi)nvvk^> /j?f97^4-.D

ac FILE COURT OF G illNAL APPEALS SEPfe^jfe H^vo .dfeft^^ot, or SEP 02 2015 Abel Acobta, Clerk AbelAcosta, Clerk 1; /VjdtzoJ /Z>^ >u^uJ 7&ML VOAS .FlLei 6/0

; AF<^kUj*yr' Was" jZeJ^^-er^r&J //J 7&mL

;: ^iS~ /Uc^arM^ ^rLLw52vS ftUTt^ Apr 77HT H*^' OF

[h^P^hiXA^X^b^ Mor^UC^^'D^d 7>fer" Cooper"'

-. P* 3Ku3£T3 LmAC (3t^Jir F^^ r^<^icATU*0 TVoteC' JUte^^1^^r/ A^cMJ^vhr^ f^fr 7?4^r" 77^r

;j>%0/gK) ~Z>J TTfeT ^oJA^&F C&i/vs,»J4L Afl^ytfUT

/ iLJO> _j i

/"- ^? jT- / J" ^ - , , , .;r, 4-C2n.s£. state me

D currency ^caicerated enalrv ci'perjur arn a vj olicwmg uiw~ v

yanrv. - exasc _• ^ an"; o.uiv o,Lii.uu'— —•"- ht Tarrant County jail /SA. ^T2QO£ia^_Ai£ respects to make misis declaration. I have read the foregoing. 77/Vv£k andP. deci: ,W1 ,re that Ihave personal knowledge of the facts cental therem and said facts are tt-ue and correct.

.,. tr, 'i32 00'i et. sea., iexas ,— r- .-ot-.- "^vsc; pursuant tc All. '-Ji'l'u- EXECuTED mTarrant County, i cxas, p^-*

P.R.C. 2nd 28 USC §1746, on this ^A_ cay of iSW

fPnrdu !\am; Nam;

2:t>m2)o_doe ?_/^j;i?y^

Address: f

u c = -: ->•

;a l e •;i; <= - :nev ror tne „/ -hp above notion was serve; ii tc SHAkON WILSON, PORT WORTH, TX 7619c on .-ctdt^ ATTORNEY. 401 W. bELKNAP ST., jiSlaay of^ia^a^OI , 2C A

y/&r?l^L Defendant's Name], Defendant Pro Se

ri 0 ^C^HI^ DOB ? /OL/if^

>rt Worth; TX 7 6102-19QS4 COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00232-CR

Bobby Williams § From Criminal District Court No. 2 § of Tarrant County (1399744D) v § August 20, 2015 § Per Curiam

The State of Texas § (nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM