Robert Lafayette Walker v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 114th District Court of Smith County (per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 12-12-00188-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS ROBERT LAFAYETTE WALKER, APPELLANT § APPEAL FROM THE 114TH V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM Appellant Robert Lafayette Walker attempts to appeal the denial of his motion requesting garnishment due process before removing money property from defendant appellant s inmates trust fund account. On June 6, 2012, this court notified Appellant that the information received in this appeal does not include a final judgment or other appealable order signed by the trial court judge and therefore does not show the jurisdiction of this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.2. Appellant was further notified that the appeal would be dismissed unless the information was amended on or before July 6, 2012, to show the jurisdiction of this court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3. The July 6 deadline has now passed, and Appellant has neither shown the jurisdiction of this court or otherwise responded to its June 6, 2012 notice. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). Opinion delivered July 18, 2012. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J. (PUBLISH) COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT JULY 18, 2012 NO. 12-12-00188-CV ROBERT LAFAYETTE WALKER, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 114th Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. 114-1754-10) THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that this court is without jurisdiction of the appeal, and that the appeal should be dismissed. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
