|
|
|
|
Opinion filed October 21, 2005
In The
Eleventh Court of Appeals
__________
No. 11-05-00314-CV
__________
ROQUE TERCERO-ARANDA, Appellant
V.
CARTER T. SCHILDKNECHT ET AL, Appellees
On Appeal from the 106th District Court
Gaines County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 05-03-14928
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Roque Tercero-Aranda is appealing from the July 18, 2005, order of the trial court. A notice of appeal was received in this court on September 13, 2005. Pursuant to TEX.R.APP.P. 25.1, the September 13 notice of appeal is deemed filed in the trial court on the same day as the day it was received in this court. A motion for new trial was not filed. The September 13 notice of appeal was filed 57 days after the date the order was signed and is not timely under TEX.R.APP.P. 26.1.
On September 20, 2005, the clerk of this court wrote appellant and advised him that it appeared that he had not timely perfected an appeal, that he had not complied with TEX.R.APP.P. 20.1, and that he was required to pay the filing fee. In our September 20 letter, appellant was directed to respond showing grounds for continuing the appeal. Appellant has responded by tendering an untimely affidavit of inability to pay costs on appeal and a motion to recuse or disqualify the entire court. Appellant has failed to pay any of the required filing fees and has failed to present grounds for continuing the appeal.
Appellant has failed to timely perfect an appeal. TEX.R.APP.P. 25.1, 26.1, & 26.3; Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615 (Tex.1997). Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM
October 21, 2005
Not designated for publication. See TEX.R.APP.P. 47.2(a).
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., and
McCall, J., and Strange, J.