Opinion
04-22-00216-CV
07-05-2022
2008 LEXUS GX470, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the Criminal District Court, Magistrate Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2021W0676 Honorable Andrew Carruthers, Judge Presiding
ORDER
REBECA C. MARTINEZ, CHIEF JUSTICE
The brief of appellant Sean Foxx was originally due on May 26, 2022. When appellant's brief was past due, we ordered him to file the brief and a response stating why appellees are not significantly injured by appellant's failure to timely file a brief. On June 9, 2022, this court received appellant's brief and response. The response states that appellant was unaware of the filing deadline because of "ineffective counsel" and that appellees are not harmed by the filing delay. This appeal arises from a civil asset forfeiture proceeding. While appellant may have been appointed counsel in a related criminal proceeding regarding theft of the automobile that is the subject of this forfeiture proceeding, he was not appointed counsel in the forfeiture proceeding. See $60,427.11 U.S. Currency v. State, No. 02-18-00165-CV, 2019 WL 3024475, at *3 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth July 11, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op.) ("There is no statutory right for appointed counsel during a civil asset forfeiture proceeding."); accord $567.00 in U.S. Currency v. State, 282 S.W.3d 244, 246-47 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 2009, no pet.). We accept appellant's excuse for late filing, but we note that appellant is proceeding pro se in this appeal.
We construe pro se briefs liberally; however, a pro se litigant is still required to follow the same rules and laws as a litigant represented by a licensed attorney. See Drum v. Calhoun, 299 S.W.3d 360, 364 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2009, pet. denied). Appellant's brief violates Rule 38 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure in that the brief lacks a list of the parties and counsel, a table of contents, a statement of the case, a statement of the issues presented, a statement of facts supported by record references, a summary of the argument, an argument with citations to authorities and to the record, a prayer, and an appendix. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1(a), (b), (d), (f), (g), (h), (i), (j), (k). The brief also violates Rules 9.4 and 9.5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure in that it does not contain a certificate of compliance or a certificate of service. See id. R. 9.4(i)(3), 9.5(d).
It is therefore ORDERED that the brief filed by appellant is STRICKEN from our record. It is further ORDERED that appellant must file an amended brief, in compliance with Rules 9.4, 9.5, and 38.1, that (1) contains a list of all parties and counsel, (2) a table of contents that reference the pages of the brief, (3) a concise statement of the nature of the case, (4) a concise statement of all issues for review, (5) a statement of facts supported by record references, (6) a succinct statement of the arguments made, (7) clear and concise arguments for the contentions made with citations to authorities and to the record, (8) a short prayer stating the nature of the relief sought, (9) an appendix with a copy of the trial court's judgment, (10) a certificate of compliance, and (11) a certificate of service. It is further ORDERED that appellant's amended brief is due to be filed no later than July 27, 2022, or this appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution. See id. R. 38.9, 42.3.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5 th day of July, 2022.