Francisco Gonzales v. State

















In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana



______________________________

No. 06-01-00223-CR

______________________________



FRANCISCO GONZALEZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee




On Appeal from the 402nd Judicial District Court

Wood County, Texas

Trial Court No. 15,705-98








Before Cornelius, C.J., Grant and Ross, JJ.

Opinion by Justice Ross

O P I N I O N

Francisco Gonzalez has filed a motion in which he asks this Court to dismiss his appeal. Pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 42.2, his motion is granted.

The appeal is dismissed.



Donald R. Ross

Justice



Date Submitted: May 21, 2002

Date Decided: May 21, 2002



Do Not Publish

160;                           


On Appeal from the 196th Judicial District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court No. 65826



                                                 




Before Morriss, C.J., Ross and Carter, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter








MEMORANDUM OPINION


            Bryan Walter, attorney of record for the mother of the children in this case, has appealed from an order in which the trial court denied his motion to enforce an award of attorney's fees from the father. The clerk's record was filed October 24, 2005. Walter did not request preparation of a reporter's record. Walter has taken no action since filing his notice of appeal September 26, 2005. He has not attempted to obtain a reporter's record, has not filed his brief based on the clerk's record, and has not contacted this Court to explain either of these failures.

            On January 26, 2006, we entered an order directing Walter to provide this Court with information adequate to show that he was attempting to effectively prosecute his appeal and warned him that, if we did not receive such information within ten days, the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to Rule 42.3 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3. Twenty days have now elapsed, and counsel has not contacted the Court.

            We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

 

                                                                                    Jack Carter

                                                                                    Justice


Date Submitted:          February 15, 2006

Date Decided:             February 16, 2006