From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chance v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont
Jan 26, 2011
No. 09-10-00506-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 26, 2011)

Opinion

No. 09-10-00506-CR

Opinion Delivered January 26, 2011. DO NOT PUBLISH.

On Appeal from the 410th District Court Montgomery County, Texas, Trial Cause No. 10-05-05347-CR.

Before McKEITHEN, C.J., GAULTNEY and KREGER, JJ.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


The clerk's record was due to be filed by November 8, 2010. The appellant did not seek to have an appellate record furnished without charge. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.2. On November 18, 2010, the trial court clerk notified that Court that appellant had not arranged to pay for the record and we notified the parties that the appeal would be dismissed for want of prosecution unless arrangements were made for filing the record or the appellant explained why he needed time for filing the record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3. The appellant subsequently filed a motion to withdraw his notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Although the motion does not bear the appellant's personal signature, the request indicates that the non-indigent appellant has failed to prosecute his appeal. The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b). APPEAL DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Chance v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont
Jan 26, 2011
No. 09-10-00506-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 26, 2011)
Case details for

Chance v. State

Case Details

Full title:DONALD RAY CHANCE, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Ninth District, Beaumont

Date published: Jan 26, 2011

Citations

No. 09-10-00506-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 26, 2011)

Citing Cases

In re Lester

Not only do the CCA's decisions in Ex parte Lester and Fournier cite the exact same reason for granting…