Opinion issued June 14, 2012.
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-10-01145-CV
———————————
JetaIME NAVARRO, Appellant
V.
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES, Appellee
On Appeal from the 309th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2006-50182
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Jetaime Navarro, appeals the trial court’s “Final Decree for Termination,” signed December 8, 2010. Appellant has neither established indigence[1] nor paid the required filing fee for his appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (requiring payment of fees in civil cases unless indigent); see also Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 51.207 (Vernon Supp. 2011), §.51.941(a) (Vernon 2005), § 101.041 (Vernon Supp. 2011) (listing fees in court of appeals); Order Regarding Fees Charged in Civil Cases in the Supreme Court and the Courts of Appeals and Before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 07-9138 (Tex. Aug. 28, 2007), reprinted in Tex. R. App. P. app. A § B(1).
Appellant was represented by appointed counsel at trial and, through counsel, claimed indigence for purposes of appeal. After a hearing, the trial court signed an order in which it found the appeal to be frivolous, found that appellant is not indigent for purposes of appeal, and denied appellant’s request for appointed appellate counsel.[2] Appellant did not challenge the trial court’s order.[3]
On February 3, 2011, the Court notified appellant that the filing fee was due and that the appeal was subject to dismissal for non-payment of fees. See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 42.3(b), (c). Appellant did not respond.
On January 24, 2012, the Court again notified appellant that the filing fee was past due and that the appeal would be dismissed if the fee was not paid within 10 days. See id. The notice was returned, marked “undeliverable.” Appellant is required to keep the Court informed of his current address. See Tex. R. App. P. 6.3(c), 9.1(b).
Because the filing fee has been past due for over a year, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 5 (allowing enforcement of rule), 42.3(b) (allowing dismissal for want of prosecution), 42.3(c) (allowing dismissal for failure to comply with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Keyes.
[1] See Act of May 22, 2001, 77th Leg., R.S., ch. 1090, § 9, 2001 Tex. Gen. Laws 2395, 2398, repealed by Act of May 5, 2011, 82d Leg., R.S., ch. 75, § 5, 2011 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 348, 349 (West) (formerly codified at Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §.263.405(d), (e)). Because the final order being appealed in this case was signed before the effective date of the Act, September 1, 2011, we apply the law in effect on the date the final order was signed.
[2] See Act of May 22, 2001, 77th Leg., R.S., ch. 1090, § 9, 2001 Tex. Gen. Laws 2395, 2398 (repealed 2011) (formerly codified at Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §.263.405(d), (e)).
[3] See id. (formerly codified at Tex. Fam. Code Ann. §.263.405(g)).