Maurice Terry v. The State of Texas--Appeal from County Court at Law No 1 of Johnson County

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-99-262-CV

MAURICE TERRY,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 1

Johnson County, Texas

Trial Court # C9900058

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The trial court found that certain items of property seized from Maurice Terry by law enforcement agents constitute gambling devices, gambling paraphernalia, or gambling proceedsand ordered the forfeiture of the property to the State. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 18.18 (Vernon Supp. 2000). In Terry s original notice of appeal, he provided the trial court cause number of a related case which the trial court had dismissed without written order. We notified him by order dated December 10, 1999 that he must amend his notice of appeal to reflect the correct trial court cause number or else the appeal would be dismissed. Terry complied with this directive.

Consistent with Terry s original notice of appeal, the trial court clerk filed a clerk s record containing the pleadings filed in the case which had been dismissed. When Terry amended his notice of appeal, we notified the trial court clerk by letter dated December 30, 1999 that a clerk s record must be filed containing the pleadings and forfeiture order filed in the trial court cause number identified in the amended notice. The trial court clerk responded by advising the Clerk of this Court that Terry had not requested or paid for such a record.

Rule of Appellate Procedure 37.3(b) provides that if an appellant fails to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk s fee for preparation of the record, the Court may:

dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution, unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without payments of costs. The court must give the appellant a reasonable opportunity to cure before dismissal.

Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b).

More than thirty days have passed since the clerk s record was due. We notified Terry of this defect by letter on February 11, 2000. Id. 37.3(b), 42.3, 44.3. He has not responded to our letter by showing that he has paid or made arrangements to pay the clerk s fee, nor has he filed an affidavit of indigence demonstrating his entitlement to proceed without payment of costs. Id. 20.1, 37.3(b), 42.3(c). Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Id. 37.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Davis,

Justice Vance, and

Justice Gray

Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution

Opinion delivered and filed March 22, 2000

Do not publish