Brady L. Byrum v. The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court of Navarro CountyAnnotate this Case
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
BRADY L. BYRUM,,
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
From the County Court
Navarro County, Texas
Trial Court # 41603
A jury found Brady Byrum guilty of speeding and the court assessed punishment of a $200 fine. Tex. Transp. Code Ann. 545.351, 545.352 (Vernon Supp. Pamph. 1996). He appealed to this court. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 4.03 (Vernon Supp. 1996). We will affirm on the transcript because he has failed to pursue this appeal.
Byrum filed a handwritten notice of appeal on November 3, 1995. The transcript was filed in this court on November 29, but no statement of facts has been filed. By a letter dated May 1, our clerk notified Byrum that the statement of facts had not been filed and this cause would be submitted on the transcript. Tex. R. App. P. 53(m). By the same order, we set May 31 as the due date for his brief. When that deadline passed without a brief being filed, we again notified Byrum that his brief was overdue and requested that a brief be filed within ten days. Id. 74(l)(2). However, no brief has been filed.
Because Byrum was convicted of a Class C misdemeanor, confinement was not a possible punishment. Tex. Penal Code Ann. 12.23 (Vernon 1994). Thus, he is not entitled to an appointed attorney. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. arts. 1.051(c), 26.04(a) (Vernon 1989 & Supp. 1996); Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, 92 S. Ct. 2006, 32 L. Ed. 2d 530 (1972); Empy v. State, 571 S.W.2d 526 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). Because he is not entitled to an appointed attorney, he bears the consequences of his failure to file a statement of facts or a brief. Thus, we conclude that his appeal should be submitted on the transcript without briefs. See Lott v. State, 874 S.W.2d 687, 688 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994); Horvath v. State, 884 S.W.2d 789, 790 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 1994, no pet.).
We have reviewed the transcript and found no fundamental error which should be examined in the interest of justice. Id. Byrum has not raised any complaint which we must consider for disposition of this appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 90(a). Therefore, we affirm his conviction.
Before Chief Justice Davis,
Justice Cummings, and
Opinion delivered and filed June 26, 1996
Do not publish