Mike Sidney Maltz v. The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court at Law No 1 of Fort Bend County

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 15, 2007.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-06-00722-CR

____________

MIKE SIDNEY MALTZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 116229

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of the offense of terroristic threat. On August 11, 2006, the trial court assessed punishment at $500,000 fine and 180 days probated for 18 months.

The clerk=s record was filed on September 8, 2006. On October 9, 2006, the court reporter advised this court that appellant had not made arrangements to pay for the reporter=s record. Notice was sent to appellant on October 11, 2006, that appellant had not made arrangements to pay for the record and that the case would be submitted without the reporter=s record unless a response was filed on or before October 26, 2006. No response was filed. On November 2, 2006, the court issued an order, directing appellant to file his brief without the reporter=s record on or before December 4, 2006. No brief was filed. Notice was sent to appellant on December 22, 2006, that the brief was late. No response was received.

On February 15, 2007, this court ordered a hearing to determine why appellant had not filed a brief in this appeal. On March 14, 2007, the record from the trial court hearing was filed in this court. The record indicated that appellant could not decide whether to pay for counsel to file a brief. The trial court allowed appellant 60-90 days to make that decision. On May 15, 2007, the court again notified appellant that the brief was late. No brief was filed.

On June 7, 2007, this court ordered another hearing to determine why appellant had not filed a brief in this appeal. On August 1, 2007, the record from the trial court hearing was filed in this court, and the trial judge found that appellant was not indigent, and that appellant was to advise the trial court by September 7, 2007, whether he wished to proceed with the appeal.

On November 6, 2007, another record from a trial court was filed, reflecting that a hearing was held on November 1, 2007. Appellant did not appear but the trial judge read into the record a letter received from appellant indicating that appellant no longer wished to pursue his appeal. Accordingly, the trial judge found that appellant no longer desires to prosecute his appeal.

On the basis of those findings, this court has considered the appeal without briefs. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b).

The case is before us without a reporter=s record or bill of exception.

We find no fundamental error.

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed November 15, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Yates, Fowler, and Guzman.

Do not publish - Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).