From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sewell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
May 21, 1969
440 S.W.2d 852 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969)

Opinion

No. 42079.

May 21, 1969.

Appeal from the 109th Judicial District Court, Winkler County, Russell D. Austin, J.

No attorney of record on appeal, for appellant.

Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.


OPINION


The conviction is for the subsequent offense of driving while intoxicated; the punishment, two years in the Texas Department of Corrections.

The appellant did not comply with Section 9 of Article 40.09, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., in that he did not file a brief in the trial court `(w)ithin thirty days after approval of the record by the court' or during any additional period which the court authorized setting forth the grounds of error of which he desires to complain on appeal. Hill v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 403 S.W.2d 797; Yarbrough v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 408 S.W.2d 230; Melick v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 409 S.W.2d 412; Dewitt v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 409 S.W.2d 852; Ochoa v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 424 S.W.2d 642.

Nothing appears in the record which should be considered under the provisions of Article 40.09, Section 13, supra.

No question of indigency is raised.

The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

Sewell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
May 21, 1969
440 S.W.2d 852 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969)
Case details for

Sewell v. State

Case Details

Full title:Lonnie Ray SEWELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: May 21, 1969

Citations

440 S.W.2d 852 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969)

Citing Cases

Stoddard v. State

The brief not being timely filed, this Court will consider only those questions which "should be reviewed in…

Smith v. State

Therefore, appellant's brief was not timely filed. That being the case, this Court will review only those…