## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 02 - 11 - 00 513 - CR

JOHN TRACY JOSEY APPELLANT
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

---------- FROM THE 271ST DISTRICT COURT OF WISE COUNTY

---------- 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

---------- Appellant Joh n Tracy Josey appeals his conviction for evading arrest or detention. A jury found Josey guilty of evading arrest, using a vehicle while in flight, and using a deadly weapon while evading arrest . The jury also found that he had been previously convicted for evading arrest, found true t he punishment enhancements for Josey’s two prior possession

- of

- a - controlled

- substance convictions , and assessed punishment of ninety

- nine years’ confinement . As

1 See Tex. R. A pp. P. 47.4.2 described below, we submitted this appeal without briefs filed by either party. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4). After reviewing the record in the interest of justice and finding no unassigned fundamental error, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. Although Josey was represented by appointed counsel, he filed a pr o se notice of appeal on October 14, 2011. On November 18, 2011, we notified Josey’s counsel that a docketing statement had not been filed, and he informed us that the trial court had held a hearing on Josey’s motion to proceed pro se on November 17, 2011 , and released him from further service. Josey filed a motion to abate on December 12, 2011. We granted this motion and abated and remanded the case to the trial court to determine whether Josey wished to prosecute his appeal, was indigent, and wished to represent himself. T he trial court filed a record from its November 17, 2011 hearing in which it admonished Josey on self

- representation and determined that he wished to prosecute his appeal pro se. In a February 9, 2012 letter, we informed Josey that h is pro se brief was due on March 12, 2012. When we received no brie f from Josey, we again abated his appeal for the trial court to determine whether Josey wished to prosecute his appeal. The trial court held another hearing in which it admonished Josey r egarding self

representation and dete rmined that he wished to prosecute his appeal pro se

. On June 6, 2012, we ordered Josey to f ile his brief by July 6, 2012.3 After again receiving no brief from Josey , we abated his appeal on August 21, 2012, for the tr ial court again to determine whether Josey wished to prosecute his appeal. T he trial court held a hearing in which it admonished Josey and determined for the third time that he wished to prosecute his appeal pro se. On December 3, 2012, we ordered Josey to file a brief by January 17,
2013 , or his appeal would be submitted without briefs. After receiving no brief, we notified the parties that the appeal would be submitted without briefs on February 28, 2013. See Tex. R. App. P

. 38.8(b)(4). Because Jos ey has failed to file a brief, n o issues or points are properly before this court. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1( f ). We have reviewed the record in the interest of justice , s ee Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4) , and found no unassigned fundamental error. See Lott v. State , 874 S.W.2d 687, 688 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994). W e affirm the trial court’s judgment and deny all pending motions

. 2

PER CURIAM
PANEL: MCCOY , WALKER, and GABRIEL, JJ. DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App

. P. 47.2(b )
DELIVERED: August 22 , 2013

2 After submission , Josey filed several motions with this court

–– a motion to abate, a motion for supplemental material allegation, a motion to reconsider our denial of a prior motion to stay, and a motion to strike two State exhibits . These mo tions fail to sufficiently excuse Josey’s failure to file a brief and do not point the court to the requisite fundamental error.