Regino Palacios v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 49th Judicial District Court of Webb County

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-03-00492-CR

Regino PALACIOS,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2000CPRP661-D1

Honorable Manuel R. Flores, // Judge Presiding

Opinion by: Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Sitting: Alma L. L pez, Chief Justice

Catherine Stone, Justice

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 31, 2005

AFFIRMED

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.

Sarah B. Duncan, Justice

Do not publish