From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Patel v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, Houston
Dec 18, 2003
No. 14-03-01082-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 18, 2003)

Opinion

No. 14-03-01082-CR

Opinion filed December 18, 2003. DO NOT PUBLISH. Tex.R.App.P. 47.2(b).

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 12 Harris County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. 5390. Affirmed.

Panel consists of Justices YATES, HUDSON and FOWLER.


MEMORANDUM OPINION


Appellant Kishorbhait Patel entered a plea of not guilty in a Houston municipal court to failure to install a portable fire extinguisher. The municipal court convicted appellant and assessed punishment at a fine of $250.00. Appellant appealed his conviction to the county court at law, which affirmed the conviction. Appellant now appeals that decision. We affirm. Appellant was charged by complaint with failure to install a portable fire extinguisher in accordance with the fire code of the City of Houston. After a non-jury trial, appellant was found guilty and fined $250.00. Because appellant failed to request a court reporter, no record was made of the trial in municipal court. Following his conviction appellant filed a motion for new trial in which he contended, among other things, that the fire inspector had lied under oath in the municipal court. The municipal court judge denied the motion for new trial and appellant appealed to the county court at law. The judge of the county court at law affirmed the municipal court judgment because appellant provided neither a reporter's record, an agreed statement of facts, or a brief with legal citations in support of his argument. We review those points appellant raised before the reviewing county court at law. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 30.00027 (Vernon Supp. 2003) (record and briefs on appeal in county court at law constitute record and briefs on appeal to court of appeals). Appellant failed to bring forward a statement of facts. Without a statement of facts, we cannot determine whether the trial court erred. Kindley v. State, 879 S.W.2d 261, 263-64 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, no pet.). In a municipal court, a court reporter is not required to record testimony in a case unless the judge or one of the parties requests a record. TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 30.00019 (Vernon Supp. 2003). The record reflects that neither the judge, nor appellant requested a record in the municipal court. Further, appellant has failed to file an agreed statement of facts. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.2. Because appellant has failed to file a complete record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Although the appellate rules now refer to the "clerk's record" and the "reporter's record," see TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5and 34.6, chapter 30 of the Government Code uses the former terms, "transcript" and "statement of facts." See Tex. Gov'T CODE ANN. § 30.00017 and 30.00019 (Vernon Supp. 2003). For purposes of this opinion, we will use the terms in the Government Code.


Summaries of

Patel v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, Houston
Dec 18, 2003
No. 14-03-01082-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 18, 2003)
Case details for

Patel v. State

Case Details

Full title:KISHORBHAIT PATEL, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, Houston

Date published: Dec 18, 2003

Citations

No. 14-03-01082-CR (Tex. App. Dec. 18, 2003)

Citing Cases

W F v. Wilhelm

The cases upon which the dissent relies largely involve the omission of the entire reporter's record on…