Christopher Loeffler v. State ( 2005 )

Opinion issued July 6, 2005

In The

Court of Appeals

For The  

First District of Texas  

____________

NO. 01-04-00094-CV

____________

CHRISTOPHER LOEFFLER, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 306th District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 02CP0124

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

          On April 15, 2005, this Court issued an order abating this appeal and remanding the case to the trial court for a hearing regarding whether appellant had paid the reporter’s fee or had made satisfactory arrangements for such payment. In the order, this Court set the following deadlines:

          June 15, 2005        Filing supplemental clerk’s record by district clerk, subject to request and payment or arrangement for payment by appellant. If no supplemental record is timely filed,

June 20, 2005Written evidence to be presented by appellant that either

                                         (1)     trial court did not timely file findings of fact or

                                         (2)     appellant timely requested a supplemental clerk’s record and paid or made satisfactory arrangements for payment for the supplemental record.

If appellant makes neither of the above showings,

          July 5, 2005           Appellant’s brief was due.

The order suspended rule 9.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure—the mailbox rule—for these deadlines and specified that, for each deadline, the required filing was to occur by 5:00 p.m. on the ordered date. The order further provided that, if appellant’s brief was not received by 5:00 p.m. on July 5, 2005, his appeal was subject to dismissal.

          Appellant has not met any of the deadlines set forth above. No supplemental clerk’s record has been filed; appellant has not shown that the trial court did not file written findings of fact or that appellant timely requested a supplemental record or that he paid for or made arrangements to pay for a supplemental record; and he has not filed an appellate brief.

          Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Nuchia and Keyes.