Danny Dale Weisinger, Sr. v. The State of TexasAppeal from 349th District Court of Houston County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 12-13-00060-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS DANNY DALE WEISINGER, SR., APPELLANT § APPEAL FROM THE 349TH V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE § HOUSTON COUNTY, TEXAS MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM We have previously issued an opinion and judgment in this appeal. See Weisinger v. State, No. 12-13-00060-CV, 2013 WL 1167208 (Tex. App. Tyler Mar. 20, 2013, no pet. h.) (mem. op.) (per curiam). Appellant Danny Dale Weisinger, Sr. filed a motion for rehearing, and we requested, but did not receive, a response to the motion. Appellant has now filed a motion to withdraw the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). In the motion, Appellant states that he no longer wishes to pursue the appeal. Accordingly, we grant Appellant s motion, withdraw his motion for rehearing, withdraw our March 20, 2013 opinion and judgment, and dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 19.1; 42.1(c), (d); 42.2(a); see also Eden Cooper, LP. v. City of Arlington, No. 02-11-00439-CV, 2012 WL 5869572, at *1 (Tex. App. Fort Worth Nov. 21, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op) (per curiam) (granting motion to dismiss appeal after filing motion for rehearing). Opinion delivered March 31, 2014. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J. (PUBLISH) COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT MARCH 31, 2014 NO. 12-13-00060-CV DANNY DALE WEISINGER, SR., Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 349th District Court of Houston County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 03CR-035) THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motion of the Appellant to dismiss the appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that Appellant s motion for rehearing be withdrawn, our March 20, 2013 opinion and judgment be withdrawn, that the appeal be dismissed, and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance.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.
