NUMBER 13-06-409-CR

MARION BARNES, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the Aransas County Court at Law

of Aransas County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Marion Barnes, appearing pro se, asks us to review the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for taking oysters from a restricted area in Aransas County. Tex. Parks & Wild. Code Ann. § 76.116(a) (Vernon 2002). Due to lack of adequate briefing, we must affirm the judgment of the district court. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1.

We recognize that persons who appear pro se are entitled to greater leniency when construing the meaning of their pleadings. Wheeler v. Green, 157 S.W.3d 439, 444 (Tex. 2005). Nevertheless, pro se litigants are not exempt from the rules of procedure. Id. (citing Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 184-85 (Tex. 1978)). An appellant's brief, for example, "must contain a clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authority and to the record." Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(h) (emphasis added). This court cannot remedy deficiencies in a litigant's brief or provide an adequate record when none is presented by the appellant. Green v. Kaposta, 152 S.W.3d 839, 841 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2005, no pet.).

In the instant case, Barnes's argument contains no citations to case law, statutory authority, the clerk's record, or the reporter's record. The brief, therefore, fails to meet even the most lenient and rudimentary application of the rules of appellate procedure. Without an argument to evaluate, we have no case to decide.

Therefore, we AFFIRM.

_________________________

GINA M. BENAVIDES,

Justice

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 23rd day of August, 2007.