Rev. Ryan \"Sasha\" Gallagher v. Texas Attorney General (Ken Paxton), Texas Department of Public Safety, Wayne A. Mueller ( 2020 )

DISMISSED and Opinion Filed April 16, 2020
S In The
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-19-00902-CV
REV. RYAN “SASHA” GALLAGHER, Appellant
V.
TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL (KEN PAXTON), TEXAS DEPARTMENT
OF PUBLIC SAFETY, WAYNE A. MUELLER, Appellees
On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-02400
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Nowell
Opinion by Chief Justice Burns
Pro se appellant Reverend Ryan “Sasha” Gallagher appeals the trial court’s
order granting appellees’ plea to the jurisdiction. When appellant filed his brief on
February 3, 2020, we determined it was deficient. By letter dated February 24, 2020,
we notified appellant that his brief failed to comply with the requirements of Texas
Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.1. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1. We provided appellant
an opportunity to file an amended brief that complied with rule 38.1’s requirements
within ten days and cautioned him that failure to comply might result in dismissal of
the appeal without further notice. See id. 38.8(a)(1); 42.3(b), (c). Appellant did not
file an amended brief.
Although civil litigants may represent themselves at trial and on appeal, pro
se litigants must adhere to our rules of evidence and procedure, including the
appellate rules of procedure. Bolling v. Farmers Branch Indep. Sch. Dist., 315
S.W.3d 893, 895 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2010, no pet.). Our appellate rules have
specific requirements for briefing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38. Among other
requirements, the rules require appellants to state concisely their complaints; provide
understandable, succinct, and clear argument showing why their complaints are
meritorious in fact and in law; cite and apply applicable law; and provide appropriate
references to the record. See id. 38.1(f–i); Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895. If an appellant
fails to provide adequate briefing, we may dismiss the appeal. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3;
Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895–96.
Appellant’s brief does not include any citations to the record or recite any
facts concerning the plea to the jurisdiction granted by the trial court. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 38.1(g), (i). Appellant only recites facts—without any references to the
record—related to his Motion for Writ of Injunction, in which appellant sought “an
Injunction allowing marijuana to be grown and used in a Temple in Dallas County.”
Additionally, appellant fails to cite any legal authority to support his legal assertions.
See id. 38.1(i). Without adequate briefing, especially the lack of support by reference
to the record and authorities, appellant is not entitled to judicial review. See id.
–2–
38.1(g), (i); Bolling, 315 S.W.3d at 895–96. Accordingly, because appellant was
given an opportunity to file an amended brief correcting noted deficiencies but has
failed to do so, we dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c); Bolling, 315
S.W.3d at 895–96.
/Robert D.Burns, III/
ROBERT D. BURNS, III
CHIEF JUSTICE
190902F.P05
–3–
S
Court of Appeals
Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
JUDGMENT
REV. RYAN “SASHA” On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial
GALLAGHER, Appellant District Court, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-02400.
No. 05-19-00902-CV V. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice
Burns. Justices Molberg and Nowell
TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL participating.
(KEN PAXTON), TEXAS
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
SAFETY, WAYNE A. MUELLER,
Appellees
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is
DISMISSED.
It is ORDERED that appellees TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL (KEN
PAXTON), TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, WAYNE A.
MUELLER recover their costs, if any, of this appeal from appellant REV. RYAN
“SASHA” GALLAGHER.
Judgment entered April 16, 2020
–4–