Aldrich Rooks v. State
Aldrich Rooks v. State
Opinion
Aldrich Rooks v. State
IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-03-00373-CR
ALDRICH ROOKS,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
From the 13th District Court
Navarro County, Texas
Trial Court # 24,003
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal under Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a). See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a); McClain v. State, 17 S.W.3d 310, 311 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, no pet.) (per curiam). We have not issued a decision in this appeal. Appellant personally signed the motion. The Clerk of this Court has sent a duplicate copy to the trial court clerk. Id. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
PER CURIAM
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Vance, and
Justice Reyna
Appeal dismissed
Opinion delivered and filed March 31, 2004
Do not publish
[CR25]
vote of the remaining members.[3] See id. No challenged justice sat with the remainder of the panel when his challenge was considered. See Tex. R. App. P. 16.3; McCullough, 50 S.W.3d at 88.In each instance, the other members of the panel found that the justice under consideration is not disqualified under article V, section 11 of the Texas Constitution, i.e., does not have an interest in the subject matter of the controversy, is not related to a party by affinity or consanguinity within the third degree, and has not been counsel in the case. Tex. Const. art. V, 11; Tex. R. App. P. 16.1; Tex. R. Civ. P. 18b(1). Therefore, the motion to disqualify is denied with respect to each justice.
The determination of whether recusal is necessary must be made on a case‑by‑case, fact‑intensive basis. McCullough, 50 S.W.3d at 89. In each instance, the remaining members of the panel found the motion without merit and found no reason to recuse the justice under consideration. Tex. R. App. P. 16.2, 16.3(b); Tex. R. Civ. P. 18b(2). Therefore, the motion to recuse is denied with respect to each justice.
PER CURIAM
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Vance, and
Justice Reyna
(Chief Justice Gray not participating)
Motion denied
Order issued and filed June 18, 2008
Do not publish
[1] Rex D. Davis is not a justice of this Court. Thus, we disregard that portion of McCulloughs motion purportedly seeking to recuse Davis.
[2] Although McCullough has failed to provide proper proof of service despite being directed to do so by notice from the Clerk of this Court, we will suspend the service requirement and address McCulloughs motion so that we can proceed to a determination of the merits of the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 2 (on its own initiative an appellate court mayto expedite a decision or for other good causesuspend a rules operation in a particular case).
[3] Chief Justice Gray declined to vote on the motion with respect to Justice Vance.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.