James Wilkins v. Nueces County, Texas ( 2015 )

NUMBER 13-14-00570-CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG JAMES WILKINS, Appellant, v. NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellee. On appeal from the 105th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ORDER Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Longoria Order Per Curiam Appellant, James Wilkins, appeals from an order of dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. He proceeds pro se and is incarcerated. This matter is currently before the Court on motions filed by appellant and a notice filed by appellee, Nueces County. On October 23, 2014, this Court abated and remanded this matter to the trial court for determinations regarding: (1) whether appellant desires to prosecute this appeal; (2) whether appellant is indigent; (3) whether appellant is entitled to a free appellate record due to his indigency; (4) whether exceptional circumstances exist such that appellant is entitled to appointed counsel; and, (5) what orders, if any should be entered to assure the filing of appropriate notices and documentation to dismiss appellant's appeal if appellant does not desire to prosecute this appeal, or if appellant desires to prosecute this appeal, to assure that the appeal will be diligently pursued. On April 23, 2015, the trial court held a hearing on the requested matters. The reporter’s record for this hearing was filed with this Court on May 5, 2015. The trial court’s findings and conclusions have not yet been filed. On March 6, 2015, after abatement, appellant filed a “motion for summary judgment” seeking judgment to be rendered in his favor in this appeal. On June 4, 2015, appellant requested that we allow him to proceed pro se on appeal without the representation of counsel. On June 17, 2015, Nueces County filed a notice with this Court stating that there is currently no dispute between the parties regarding the issues submitted to the trial court on abatement. Nueces County avers that the parties agree that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, that appellant is indigent and entitled to a free appellate record, and that appellant has withdrawn his request for appointed counsel. Nueces County thus asserts that “it appears that the parties are in agreement to have the abatement lifted 2 and to have the complete appellate record filed so that the appeal may proceed without any additional delay.” Accordingly, we REINSTATE the appeal. Our previous order requesting findings and conclusions has been rendered moot. Appellant’s motion to appoint counsel, which was previously carried with case, is DISMISSED as moot. We GRANT appellant’s request to proceed pro se; however, we caution appellant to fully comply with the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. We DENY appellant’s motion for summary judgment and will review the merits of this appeal based on full briefing by the parties. To the extent that appellant’s pleadings seek further relief, any such relief is DENIED. The clerk’s record and reporter’s records shall be filed without the necessity of payment and this appeal shall proceed in due course. It is so ORDERED. PER CURIAM Delivered and filed the 30th day of June, 2015. 3