Court Opinion

ID: 2925957
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 21:30:09.417786+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:08.199936
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-07-727-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

_____________________________________________________________ 
 
ARMANDO EUGENE HICKS, 	Appellant,

v.

OFFICER MILAGROS G. DELOSREYES,	Appellee. 
_____________________________________________________________ 

On appeal from the 343rd District Court 

of Bee County, Texas.

_____________________________________________________________ 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

 
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

	Appellant, Armando Eugene Hicks, appearing pro se, attempted to perfect an
appeal from a judgment entered by the 343rd District Court of Cameron County, Texas,
in cause number B-07-1184-CV-C.  Judgment in this cause was signed on October 12,
2007.  The record fails to contain a motion for new trial.   Pursuant to Texas Rule of
Appellate Procedure 26.1, appellant's notice of appeal was due on November 11, 2007,
but was not filed until December 4, 2007.  See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1.  Appellant did not file
a motion for extension of time to file his notice of appeal.  See id. 26.3.  
	On December 6, 2007, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant of this defect so that
steps could be taken to correct the defect, if it could be done. Appellant was advised that,
if the defect was not corrected within ten days from the date of receipt of this Court's letter,
the appeal would be dismissed. To date, no response has been received from appellant
providing a reasonable explanation for the late filing of the notice of appeal.  Appellant has,
however, filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.
          The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant's
failure to timely perfect his appeal, and appellant's failure to respond to this Court's notice,
is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  Accordingly,
the appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION.  See Tex. R. App. P.
42.3(a)(c).  Appellant's motion to proceed in forma pauperis is likewise dismissed for want
of jurisdiction.

									PER CURIAM
Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed 
this the 10th day of January, 2008.