Clyde Dene Miles v. Richard Babcock, Warden Greta Bennett, Assistant Warden Dr. Nugen ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                                 COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
    FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
    ORDER
    Appellate case name:        Clyde Dene Miles v. Richard Babcock, Greta Bennett, and
    Dy Nugen
    Appellate case number:      01-22-00408-CV
    Trial court case number:    20-DCV-270490
    Trial court:                434th District Court of Fort Bend County
    Appellant, Clyde Dene Miles, incarcerated and proceeding pro se, filed a notice of
    appeal from the trial court’s April 25, 2022 order dismissing the underlying case for want
    of prosecution. Since filing his notice of appeal, appellant has filed several motions with
    this Court, including motions for appointment of appellate counsel and motions to extend
    the deadline to file his appellate brief.
    On August 16, 2022, the Court entered an order denying appellant’s requests that
    this Court appoint him counsel on appeal. In our August 16, 2022 order, we stated that an
    appellate court, such as this Court, does not have the authority to appoint counsel to any
    party, regardless of circumstance. Instead, the authority and power to appoint counsel is
    exclusively granted to a trial court, and any request for appointment of counsel must be
    directed to the trial court. See In re Burt, Nos. 05-15-01212-CV and 05-15-001213-CV,
    
    2016 WL 6135526
    , at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Oct. 21, 2016, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.);
    see also TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 24.016 (“A district judge may appoint counsel to attend
    to the cause of a party who makes an affidavit that he is too poor to employ counsel to
    attend to the cause.”).
    On October 17, 2022, appellant filed a letter-motion with this Court. In his
    letter-motion, appellant again requests that the Court provide him with appointed appellate
    counsel. As discussed above, this Court cannot appoint counsel to a party on appeal. We
    note that the Texas Supreme Court has held that “in some exceptional cases, the public and
    private interests at stake are such that the administration of justice may be best served by
    appointing a lawyer to represent an indigent civil litigant.” See Travelers Indem. Co. v.
    Mayfield, 
    923 S.W.2d 590
    , 594 (Tex. 1996). However, only a trial court may appoint
    counsel to a party, and a request for appointment of counsel should be directed to the trial
    court. Accordingly, appellant’s motion to appoint appellate counsel is denied.
    In his letter-motion, appellant states that he does not “understand the law and what
    the [C]our wants from” him. Appellant therefore states that to the extent the Court does
    not appoint a lawyer to him to assist in preparing his brief, “the [C]ourt can dismiss the
    case.” Appellant’s brief is currently due to be filed on or before January 17, 2023. If
    appellant does not intend to file a brief by January 17, 2023, appellant may notify the Court
    and file a motion to dismiss his appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). If appellant does
    not file a brief by January 17, 2023, and does not file a motion to dismiss, the Court may
    dismiss his appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(b).
    It is so ORDERED.
    Judge’s signature: _____/s/ Amparo Guerra_____
     Acting individually  Acting for the Court
    Date: ___October 27, 2022_____
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-22-00408-CV

Filed Date: 10/27/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/31/2022