Court Opinion

ID: 3072451
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 00:46:57.940362+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:58:23.703302
License: Public Domain

In The

                               Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                           ____________________
                              NO.   09-13-00545-CV
                              NO.   09-13-00546-CV
                              NO.   09-13-00547-CV
                              NO.   09-13-00548-CV
                           ____________________

                     TOMMIE ALLEN RINGO, Appellant

                                        V.

                      THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
_______________________________________________________           ______________

                    On Appeal from the 1A District Court
                            Jasper County, Texas
               Trial Cause Nos. 33434, 33437, 33440, and 33441
________________________________________________________           _____________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

      On September 27, 2013, the trial court signed orders granting Tommie Allen

Ringo’s petitions for expunction in case numbers 33434, 33437, 33440, and 33441.

We remanded the appeals to the trial court for a determination of the date on which

the appellant received notice that the orders had been signed. See Tex. R. Civ. P.

306a(5), Tex. R. App. P. 4.2(c). Ringo appeared at the hearing through telephonic

                                        1
transmission. During the hearing, Ringo stated that he did not wish to pursue his

appeals in these four cases. The trial court found that Ringo first received notice

that the orders had been signed on November 15, 2013, more than twenty days

after the notice period; that Ringo filed notices of appeal sixty-six days after the

orders were signed; that Ringo does not desire to pursue his appeals; and that no

other party filed a notice of appeal in case numbers 33434, 33437, 33440, and

33441. The appellate records have been supplemented with a transcript of the

hearing and the trial court’s findings.

      Because the appellant stated in open court that he did not wish to pursue his

appeals, we apply Rule 2 to suspend the requirement of the filing of a written

motion to dismiss the appeals, and accept the appellant’s testimony before the trial

court as a motion for voluntary dismissal of the appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 2,

42.1(a); see also Livesay v. Wellogix, Inc., No. 01-02-01138-CV, 2003 WL
139730, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Jan. 9 2003, no pet.) (mem. op.)

(accepting correspondence regarding settlement and proposed order from appellee

as a motion for voluntary dismissal under Rule 42.1(a)(1)). No other party filed a

notice of appeal in trial court case numbers 33434, 33437, 33440, and 33441. We

dismiss the appeals.

                                          2
      APPEALS DISMISSED.

                                           ________________________________
                                                  STEVE McKEITHEN
                                                      Chief Justice

Opinion Delivered March 27, 2014

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.

                                       3