JAMIE JAKSCH v. THE STATE OF TEXAS (2011)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Opinion By Justice O'Neill

A municipal court jury found appellant Jamie Jaksch guilty of violating an ordinance prohibiting the operation of non-motorized passenger transport without a licence.   The jury assessed a $500 fine.   Jaksch appealed to the county criminal court of appeals, which affirmed his conviction.   See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 30.00014(c) (West Supp.2010).   Appellant now appeals to this court.   He raises one point of error asserting the ordinance upon which his conviction is based is facially void for vagueness.   We affirm.

To perfect an appeal from a municipal court, an appellant must file a written motion for new trial with the municipal clerk setting forth the points of error of which appellant complains.  Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 30.00014(c) (West Supp.2010).   An issue not presented in the motion for new trial is not preserved for review.  Brooks v. State, 226 S.W.3d 607, 609 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, no pet.);  Lambert v. State, 908 S.W.2d 53, 54 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1995, no pet.);  Purnell v. State, 921 S.W.2d 432, (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1996, pet. ref'd).   Here, appellant filed a timely motion for new trial, but he did not raise his complaint concerning the constitutionality of the statute.   Therefore, appellant waived this issue.   We resolve appellant's sole issue against him and affirm the trial court's judgment.

Tex.R.App. P. 47

100909F.U05

MICHAEL J. O'NEILL JUSTICE