Opinion
05-24-00406-CV
11-25-2024
2008 FORD FUSION VIN #3FAHP02128R153677, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 271st District Court Wise County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CV22-09-722
Before Justices Pedersen, III, Smith, and Garcia
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DENNISE GARCIA JUSTICE
Appellant filed his brief on August 19, 2024. We then notified appellant, who is proceeding pro se, that his brief failed to comply with rule 38.1 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1. We listed numerous defects in the brief, including that the brief did not contain a complete list of all parties to the trial court's judgment, it did not contain a table of contents with references to the pages of the brief, the table of contents did not indicate the subject matter of each issue, the brief does not contain an index of authorities, and neither the statement of the case nor the statement of facts was supported by record references. Further, the argument section of the brief does not contain any citations to authority or to the record. We instructed appellant to file an amended brief correcting these deficiencies within ten days. In the request, we cautioned appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal if appellant failed to file an amended brief in compliance with the rules of appellate procedure. To date, appellant has failed to do so.
The purpose of an appellant's brief is to acquaint the Court with the issues in a case and to present argument that will enable us to decide the case. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.9. The right to appellate review extends only to complaints made in accordance with our rules of appellate procedure, which require an appellant to concisely articulate the issues we are asked to decide, to make clear, concise, and specific arguments in support of appellant's position, to cite appropriate authorities, and to specify the pages in the record where each alleged error can be found. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1; Lee v. Abbott, No. 05-18-01185-CV, 2019 WL 1970521, at *1 (Tex. App-Dallas May 3, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.); Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 315 S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App-Dallas 2010, no pet.). Even liberally construing appellant's brief, we conclude it fails to acquaint the Court with the issues in the case, does not enable us to decide the case, does not make clear, concise, specific arguments supported by legal authority, and is in flagrant violation of rule 38.
Although given the opportunity to correct the brief, appellant did not do so. Under these circumstances, we strike appellant's brief and dismiss this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.9(a); 42.3(b),(c).
JUDGMENT
In accordance with this Court's opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.