Opinion
No. 4-03-00492-CR.
Delivered and Filed: August 31, 2005. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Appeal from the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas, Trial Court No. 2000CPRP661-D1, Honorable Manuel R. Flores, Judge Presiding. Affirmed.
The Honorable Manuel R. Flores signed the judgment; however, the Honorable Fred Shannon, a former judge sitting by assignment, presided over the trial and imposed the sentence.
Sitting: Alma L. LÓPEZ, Chief Justice, Catherine STONE, Justice, SARAH B. Duncan, Justice.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Regino Palacios appeals the trial court's judgment convicting him of injury to a child and sentencing him to five years' imprisonment, probated. We affirm. 1. In his first issue, Palacios contends "the trial court erred in admitting `evidence' of a prior conviction." However, Palacios does not explain why the evidence is inadmissible or how the trial court erred in admitting it; rather, he refers us to the text of Texas Rule of Evidence 404 and immediately thereafter states that "[a]part from the fact that the `evidence' of the prior domestic violence should not have been admissible, the prosecutor has an affirmative duty to correct false evidence." By failing to provide a "clear and concise" argument for the contentions made, Tex.R.App.P. 38.1 (h), Palacios has waived this issue. See Favalaro v. Comm'n for Lawyer Discipline, 13 S.W.3d 831, 839-40 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2000, no pet.) ("[Appellant] does not explain or support his contention that the trial court erred in overruling his objections to the Commission's counsel, and he does not set forth with any particularity the reasons why the trial court erred in sustaining the Commission's objections to [his] exhibits. We are not responsible for making [appellant's] argument for him."). 2. In his second issue, Palacios contends the trial court erred "in failing to dismiss the case for denial of [his] right to a speedy trial." However, Palacios fails to provide any substantive analysis regarding the first three factors enunciated in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S. Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972), and relies on evidence outside the record. Consequently, by failing to brief his argument adequately, Palacios has waived this issue as well. See Tex.R.App.P. 38.1(h). We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The docket sheet is not part of the record and "[t]he record, not the docket entry, is the authoritative evidence upon which the parties must rely on appeal." Bell v. State, 734 S.W.2d 83, 83 (Tex.App.-Austin 1987, no pet.).