Opinion
NO. 12-21-00033-CV
03-19-2021
BRIAN CRAIG STEVENSON, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
APPEAL FROM THE 321ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT SMITH COUNTY, TEXASMEMORANDUM OPINION
This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules, a court order, or a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).
A party who is not excused by statute or the appellate rules from paying costs must pay--at the time an item is presented for filing--whatever fees are required by statute or Texas Supreme Court order. TEX. R. APP. P. 5; see TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1. An appellate court may enforce Rule 5 by any order that is just. TEX. R. APP. P. 5. After giving ten days' notice, an appellate court may dismiss an appeal because the appellant failed to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules, a court order, or a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).
On March 2, 2021, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant, Brian Craig Stevenson, that the filing fee in this appeal is due and that the appeal would be subject to dismissal if the fee was not paid on or before March 12. The date for remitting the filing fee passed, and Appellant has not responded to this Court's notice, paid the filing fee, or otherwise shown that he is excused from paying the fee.
Appellant is acting pro se; however, pro se litigants are held to the same standards as licensed attorneys and must comply with all applicable rules of procedure; otherwise, pro se litigants would benefit from an unfair advantage over parties represented by counsel. Muhammed v. Plains Pipeline, L.P., No. 12-16-00189-CV, 2017 WL 2665180, at *2 n.3 (Tex. App.—Tyler June 21, 2017, no pet.) (mem. op.). --------
Because Appellant failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 5, the appeal is dismissed.See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). All pending motions are overruled as moot. Opinion delivered March 19, 2021.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.
COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS
JUDGMENT
Appeal from the 321st District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 13-0825-D)
THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed.
It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.
By per curiam opinion.
Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.