Reyes Guadalupe Gonzales v. State

Reyes Guadalupe Gonzales v. State

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-01-381-CR

     REYES GUADALUPE GONZALES,

                                                                              Appellant

     v.

     THE STATE OF TEXAS,

                                                                              Appellee

From the 54th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court # 96-603-C

                                                                                                                

MEMORANDUM OPINION

                                                                                                                

      Reyes Guadalupe Gonzales has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal requesting that this Court “withdraw Appellant’s notice of appeal and dismiss this appeal.” In relevant portion, Rule 42.2 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure states:

(a) At any time before the appellate court’s decision, the appellate court may dismiss the appeal if the party that appealed withdraws its notice of appeal—by filing a written withdrawal in duplicate with the appellate clerk, who must immediately send the duplicate copy to the trial court clerk. An appellant must personally sign the written withdrawal.

Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a). We have not issued a decision in this appeal. The motion is signed by Gonzales. See id. A copy has been sent to the trial court clerk. Id.

      This appeal is dismissed.

 

                                                                   PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

      Justice Vance, and

      Justice Gray

Dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed February 6, 2002

Do not publish

[CR25]

Palatino'>We find that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees to Katie Spahn-Northern because there was no statutory authority to support an award of attorney’s fees.  We do not have jurisdiction to review the denial of Rodney Spahn’s motion for judgment nunc pro tunc.  Therefore, we modify the judgment of the trial court to delete the award of attorney’s fees to Katie Spahn-Northern, and otherwise affirm the judgment of the trial court signed on July 1, 2009.  The appeal of the judgment signed on September 9, 2009 is dismissed.

 

                                                                        TOM GRAY

                                                                        Chief Justice

 

Before Chief Justice Gray,

            Justice Reyna, and

            Justice Davis

Modified in part, and as modified, affirmed in part; dismissed in part

Opinion delivered and filed June 16, 2010

[CV06]

---

[1] There were two separate judgments entered that form the basis of this appeal.  The first is entitled “Order on 1^st Amended Motion to Enter QDROs,” which was signed on July 1, 2009.  The second is entitled “Order on Motion for Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc,” which was signed by the trial court on September 9, 2009.