Approximately Four Thousand One Hundred Sixty-Four Dollars ($4,164.00) in U.S. Currency v. The State of Texas Appeal from 114th District Court of Smith County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 12-22-00284-CV IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS APPROXIMATELY FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SIXTYFOUR DOLLARS ($4,164.00) IN U.S. CURRENCY, APPELLANT § APPEAL FROM THE 114TH § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT § SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE MEMORANDUM OPINION PER CURIAM This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). A party who is not excused by statute or the appellate rules from paying costs must pay-at the time an item is presented for filing--whatever fees are required by statute or Texas Supreme Court order. TEX. R. APP. P. 5. An appellate court may enforce Rule 5 by any order that is just. Id. After giving ten days’ notice, an appellate court may dismiss an appeal because the appellant failed to comply with a requirement of the appellate rules, a court order, or a notice from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). On October 25, 2022, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant, Juan Carlos LunaTavares, that the filing fee in this appeal is due. Appellant was informed that failure to remit the filing fee on or before November 4, would result in the Court’s taking appropriate action, including dismissal of the case without further notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). The date for remitting the filing fee passed, and Appellant has not responded to this Court’s notice, paid the filing fee, or otherwise shown that he is excused from paying the fee. 1 Because Appellant failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 5, the appeal is dismissed. 2 See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). Opinion delivered November 17, 2022. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J. The case information sheet from the Smith County District Clerk’s Office reflects that Appellant has not been declared indigent. 1 We also note that Appellant’s notice of appeal fails to comply with appellate Rule 9.5 and Section 51.017(a) of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5 (service); see also TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.017(a) (West Supp. 2019) (notice of appeal must be served on each court reporter responsible for preparing reporter’s record). 2 2 COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS JUDGMENT NOVEMBER 17, 2022 NO. 12-22-00284-CV APPROXIMATELY FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED SIXTY-FOUR DOLLARS ($4,164.00) IN U.S. CURRENCY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee Appeal from the 114th District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 21-1329-B) THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that this appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed; and that this decision be certified to the court below for observance. By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, 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.
