Gerald Allen Perry ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                                  COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
    FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
    ORDER
    Appellate case name:      Gerald Allen Perry v. John B. Holmes
    Appellate case number:    01-10-01072-CV
    Trial court case number: 2009-62814
    Trial court:              151st District Court of Harris County
    On January 3, 2011, appellant, Gerald Allen Perry, filed an affidavit of indigence in this
    court in the above-referenced appeal. On July 25, 2011, we referred the affidavit to the trial
    court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(c)(1), (h)(4). On July 29, 2011, the district clerk timely filed a
    contest to the affidavit.1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(e). Therefore, the trial court was required to
    either conduct a hearing or sign an order extending the time to conduct the hearing by August 8,
    1
    In the contest, the district clerk argues that appellant failed to include all of the
    information required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1(b) and failed to file the
    affidavit or declaration and the certified copy of his trust account statement required by
    Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 14.004. See Act of May 19, 1995, 74th
    Leg., R.S., ch. 378, § 2, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 2921, 2922–23, amended by Act of June
    29, 2011, 82nd Leg., 1st C.S., ch. 3, §§ 12.01, 12.02, 2011 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 116, 161
    (West) (current version at TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. §§ 14.002, 14.004(a), (c)
    (West Supp. 2011)); TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(b). An affidavit of indigence need not,
    however, specifically address all the items enumerated in Rule 20.1(b), so long as it
    provides sufficient information to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the party
    is unable to pay costs on appeal. See In re C.H.C., 
    331 S.W.3d 426
    , 429 (Tex. 2011);
    Moreno v. Perez, 
    363 S.W.3d 725
    , 742 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, no pet.).
    Further, chapter 14 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code was inapplicable to appellate
    court cases when appellant filed his affidavit of indigence. See Act of May 19, 1995,
    74th Leg., R.S., ch. 378, § 2, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 2921, 2922, amended by Act of June
    29, 2011, 82nd Leg., 1st C.S., ch. 3, § 12.01, 2011 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 116, 161 (West)
    (current version at TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 14.002 (West Supp. 2011));
    Jackson v. Tex. Bd. of Pardons & Paroles, 
    178 S.W.3d 272
    , 277 (Tex. App.—Houston
    [1st Dist.] 2005, no pet.); Nabelek v. Garrett, 
    94 S.W.3d 648
    , 649 (Tex. App.—Houston
    [14th Dist.] 2002, order, pet. dism’d w.o.j.).
    2011. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(i)(2). Further, to properly sustain the contest, the trial court was
    required to sign an order sustaining the contest within the prescribed period for the hearing. See
    TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(i)(4). The clerk’s record does not reflect that the trial court signed an order
    extending the period for the hearing or ruled on the contest by August 8, 2011. See 
    id. Instead, the
    record reflects that the trial court signed both an order extending the time for holding the
    hearing and an order sustaining the contest on August 16, 2011—eight days after the deadline
    had expired. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(i)(2). Appellant, in a document styled “Appellant’s
    Request for Extension of Time to Perfect Appeal,” challenged the trial court’s ruling on the
    contest to his affidavit of indigence. Because the order extending the time for holding a hearing
    and the order sustaining the contest were signed after the 10 days had expired, the trial court was
    without authority to sustain the contest and abused its discretion by signing the orders. See
    Ramirez v. Packer, 
    807 S.W.2d 728
    , 729 (Tex. 1991); In re VanDeWater, 
    966 S.W.2d 730
    , 734
    (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, no pet.). Accordingly, the allegations in the affidavit are
    deemed true, and appellant is entitled to proceed without advance payment of costs.2 TEX. R.
    APP. P. 20.1(i)(4).
    The Clerk of this Court is ORDERED to make an entry in this Court’s records that
    appellant is indigent and is allowed to proceed on appeal without advance payment of costs.
    It is further ORDERED that the District Clerk file with this Court, within 30 days of the
    date of this order and at no cost to appellant, a clerk’s record containing the items specified in
    Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.5(a). See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(k).
    Appellant’s brief is ORDERED filed with this Court within 30 days after the date the
    clerk’s record is filed.3 See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). Appellee’s brief, if any, must be filed within
    30 days after the date the appellant’s brief is filed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(b).
    Judge’s signature: /s/ Justice Jim Sharp
     Acting individually       Acting for the Court
    Date: July 19, 2012
    2
    Appellant filed an affidavit of indigence in the trial court on August 15, 2011, which the
    district clerk timely contested on August 22, 2011 and the trial court timely sustained on
    August 31, 2011. Nevertheless, because the rules only provide for one affidavit of
    indigence to be filed, the first affidavit filed by appellant controls the deadlines for filing
    and ruling on a contest. See, e.g., Ramirez v. Packer, 
    807 S.W.2d 728
    , 729 (Tex. 1991)
    (holding that in case where multiple contests to affidavit of indigence are filed, filing of
    first contest fixes time within which trial court must rule on contests); In re Velez-Uresti,
    
    361 S.W.3d 200
    , 206 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012, pet. denied) (stating that rules do not
    contemplate sequential or successive filing of affidavits of indigence).
    3
    The court reporter informed us on August 2, 2011 that no reporter’s record exists.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-10-01072-CV

Filed Date: 7/19/2012

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/16/2015