BILLY RELL MILES v. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, ET AL.--Appeal from 94th District Court of Nueces County

Annotate this Case

NUMBER 13-02-413-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

____________________________________________________________________

BILLY RELL MILES, Appellant,

v.

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, ET AL., Appellees.

____________________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 94th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________________

O P I N I O N

Before Justices Dorsey, Rodriguez, and Castillo

Opinion Per Curiam

 

Appellant, BILLY RELL MILES, perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 94th District Court of Nueces County, Texas, in cause number 00-4745-C. The clerk=s record was filed on July 17, 2002. No reporter=s record was filed. Appellant=s brief was due on August 16, 2002. To date, no appellate brief has been received.

When the appellant has failed to file a brief in the time prescribed, the Court may dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless the appellant reasonably explains the failure and the appellee is not significantly injured by the appellant=s failure to timely file a brief. Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1).

On September 16, 2002, notice was given to all parties that this appeal was subject to dismissal pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a)(1). Appellant was given ten days to explain why the cause should not be dismissed for failure to file a brief. To date, no appellate brief has been filed.

The Court, having examined and fully considered the documents on file, appellant=s failure to file a proper appellate brief, this Court=s notice, and appellant=s failure to file a proper response, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution. The appeal is hereby DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.3.

Opinion delivered and filed

this the 19th day of December, 2002

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.