Court Opinion

ID: 4208295
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-10-02 18:17:46.891332+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:40:09.021172
License: Public Domain

In The

                               Court of Appeals
                    Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
                           ____________________
                              NO. 09-17-00287-CV
                           ____________________

                 IN RE COMMITMENT OF JOHN GRAVES

________________________________________________________________________

                   On Appeal from the 435th District Court
                        Montgomery County, Texas
                      Trial Cause No. 12-05-05201-CV
________________________________________________________________________

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      John Graves was civilly committed in 2012. See generally In re Commitment

of Graves, No. 09-13-00141-CV, 2013 WL 6705980, at *1 (Tex. App.—Beaumont

Dec. 19, 2013, pet. denied) (mem. op.). On June 15, 2017, the trial court signed a

biennial review order that continued the previous order of civil commitment without

modification. Graves filed a notice of appeal. We questioned our jurisdiction and

asked the parties to file responses regarding whether the appeal was frivolous. The

State filed responses but no response has been filed by Graves.

                                         1
 
 
 

       A biennial review order continuing a person’s civil commitment is not an

appealable order. See In re Commitment of Richards, 395 S.W.3d 905, 908–10 (Tex.

App.—Beaumont 2013, pet. denied). Graves has not identified an order that is

appealable at this time.

       “To determine whether an appeal is objectively frivolous, we review the

record from the viewpoint of the advocate and decide whether the advocate had

reasonable grounds to believe the case could be reversed.” Glassman v. Goodfriend,

347 S.W.3d 772, 782 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, pet. denied). Graves

has not presented any authority contrary to Richards nor has he presented any

argument that Richards was wrongly decided and should be overruled. We conclude

that the appeal is frivolous. See Tex. R. App. P. 45. In the event Graves files a

frivolous appeal with this Court in the future, the Court will consider imposing

sanctions. See id.  

       The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a);

43.2(f).

       APPEAL DISMISSED.

                                              ________________________________
                                                      CHARLES KREGER
                                                           Justice

                                          2
 
 
 

Submitted on September 27, 2017
Opinion Delivered September 28, 2017

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

                                       3