Court Opinion

ID: 3077775
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 01:28:56.252975+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:27:42.515048
License: Public Domain

In The

                                 Court of Appeals
                     Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                             ____________________
                                NO. 09-12-00307-CR
                             ____________________

                    JANSON MICHAEL DURNEY, Appellant

                                           V.

                        THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
_______________________________________________________                ______________

                 On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5
                         Montgomery County, Texas
                          Trial Cause No. 11-272011
________________________________________________________                _____________

                           MEMORANDUM OPINION

      The trial court convicted Janson Michael Durney of the misdmeanor offense of

failure to identify and assessed a one year jail term and a $500 fine as punishment, then

suspended the imposition of the jail sentence and placed Durney on community

supervision for eighteen months. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 38.02(b), (d)(2) (West

2011). Representing himself pro se and without claiming indigence, Durney appealed but

did not make payment arrangements for the record. After giving notice and providing an

opportunity to cure, we dismissed the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). We granted

                                           1
Durney’s motion to reinstate after we received the clerk’s record, but he failed to file a

brief. We remanded the case to the trial court with instructions to determine whether

Durney desires to prosecute his appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(2). After conducting

a hearing, which Durney failed to attend, the trial court found that the appellant no longer

desires to pursue the appeal.

       Durney’s failure to file a brief constitutes abandonment of the appeal. See Parker

v. State, 69 S.W.3d 677, 678 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002, no pet.). Durney is not indigent

and has failed to make arrangements for filing a brief. Accordingly, we exercise our

authority to consider this appeal without briefs. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4). We

review the record in the interest of justice. Lott v. State, 874 S.W.2d 687, 688 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1994). Our review of the record has not revealed an error requiring reversal on

unassigned error. We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

       AFFIRMED.

                                                 ________________________________
                                                        DAVID GAULTNEY
                                                               Justice

Opinion Delivered March 27, 2013
Do Not Publish

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

                                             2