Emmit Brager v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 12th District Court of Walker County

In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
______________________________
No. 06-01-00131-CR
______________________________
EMMITT BRAGER, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 12th Judicial District Court
Walker County, Texas
Trial Court No. 20,484
Before Morriss, C.J., Ross and Carter, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Emmitt Brager has filed an appeal from his conviction by a jury for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and possession of a deadly weapon in a penal institution. The clerk's record was filed in this case on December 27, 2001, and the reporter's record was filed on April 8, 2002. Brager is representing himself in his appeal.

Brager has devoted an enormous amount of effort in this appeal to addressing peripheral matters. His brief was originally due on May 8, 2002. Instead of preparing a brief, Brager attempted to show this Court through multiple motions that both records were incomplete or inaccurate. We abated the appeal to the trial court for a hearing. The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing, at which Brager was present, and concluded, based on the evidence, that the clerk's and reporter's records were both complete and accurate.

During this time period, Brager also filed a series of motions, which were overruled, seeking to recuse all of the justices on this Court. His petition asking the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to review those orders was dismissed.

Brager also filed a series of motions with this Court requesting more time to file his appellate brief and asking us to order the penal institution in which he is incarcerated to deliver to him all of his legal records so that he could prepare his brief. Prison officials informed this Court that Brager had multiple duffle bags full of documents. The penal institution requires prisoners to follow certain procedures in obtaining documents and sets certain limitations on the quantity of paper materials an inmate can access at one time. The institution informed this Court that Brager had refused to avail himself of that avenue and that he had effectively taken an "all or nothing" position and demanded access to all of his documents at once. Failing that, he refused to accept any of them.

Brager then came before this Court asking us to order the prison to provide all of the documents at once. We declined to do so. Brager continues to file motions to extend time to file his appellate brief in which he asks for extensions of thirty days from the date on which all of his documents are finally delivered to him. We have denied those motions and reminded him of the date his brief was due.

In our last order in this case, we ordered Brager to file his brief no later than December 9, 2002. The original due date for Brager's brief was over eight months ago, and it has been over four months since Brager's last contention about the completeness of the record was finally resolved. Brager has had every opportunity to pursue this appeal but has not done so.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal, under our inherent authority, for want of prosecution. Stavinoha v. State, 82 S.W.3d 690, 691 (Tex. App.-Waco 2002, no pet. h.); Bush v. State, 80 S.W.3d 199, 200 (Tex. App.-Waco 2002, no pet. h.); see also McDaniel v. State, 75 S.W.3d 605 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 2002, no pet.); Rodriguez v. State, 970 S.W.2d 133, 135 (Tex. App.-Amarillo 1998, pet. ref'd).

 

We dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.

 

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

 

Date Submitted: February 10, 2003

Date Decided: February 11, 2003

 

Do Not Publish