D ISMISS ; Opinion F iled S eptember 21, 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05
- 20
- 00222
- CR DANIEL MORGAN CROW , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019
- 1
- 0957 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Myers, Nowell, and Evans Opinion by Justice Nowell Daniel Morgan Crow was convicted in the Van Alstyne M unicipal C ourt of the tra ffic offense of speeding and assessed a $224 fine. He appealed to Grayson County Court at Law. Following a de novo trial before the court, appellant was again convicted and assessed a $ 100 fine

. Appellant then filed a pro se notice of appeal of the judgme nt of the Grayson County Court at Law. The reporter’s record , due April 13, 2020 , was not filed. W e notified court reporter Deana West and directed her to file the (1) reporter’s record, (2) written verification no hearings were recorded, or (3) written ve rification appellant had not– 2

–

requested the reporter’s record. On April 17, 2020, Ms. West confirmed she reported the nonjury trial, but that appellant had not requested the reporter’s record. We then notified appellant by le tter dated April 20, 2020 and di rected him to provide the Court with (1) notice that appellant requested preparation of the r eporter’s record , and (2) written verification that he paid or made arrangements to pay the reporter’s
fee documentation or that he had been found to be entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant the failure to do so would result in the appeal being submitted without the reporter’s record. App ellant did not respond , and

we ordered the appeal submitted without the reporter’s record . We also ordered appellant ’s brief filed June 10, 2020. When it was not filed , we directed appellant to file his brief and an extension motion by June 25, 2020. On August 5, 2020, we ordered appellant to file his brief by August 17, 2020 , cautioning him that the failure to do so would result in the Court taking whatever action it deemed appropriate , including dismissing his appeal

. Appellant has not responded to the Court’s letters

or order s . Whe n a case arising in the justice or municipal courts is appealed to the county court, county criminal court, or county court at law, and the fine imposed by that court does not exceed $100, this Court lacks jurisdiction “unless the sole issue is the
constitut ionality of the statute or ordinance on which the conviction is based.” T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC
. A NN . art. 4.03; Montpas v. State , 997 S.W.2d 650, 651 (Tex. App.

–– Dallas 1999, no pet.) (quoting article 4.03); Marzett v. State , No. 05

– 15

–– 3

–

0 0147

– CR, 20 16 WL 1679744 , at * 1 (Tex. App.

–– Dallas A pr. 25 , 201 6 , no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication)

. The record in this case shows appellant appealed his conviction by the Van Alstyne Municipal Court to the Grayson County Court at Law, where he was convi cted in a trial de novo and fined $100. Because his fine does not exceed $100, we would have jurisdiction over his appeal only if he challeng ed the constitutionality of a statute or ordinance on which his conviction wa s based. By not filing a brief raisin g a constitutional challenge , appellant has failed to invoke our jurisdiction.
W e dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2(b) 200222 F

. U 05 /Erin A. Nowell/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE– 4

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
DANIEL MORGAN CROW, Appellant
No. 05

- 20

- 00222

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law, Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2019

- 1

- 0957. Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell. Justices Myers and Evans participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Judgment entered this 21st day of September , 2020

.