SAFETY NATIONAL CASUALTY CORPORATION AGENT MICHAEL COX v. THE STATE OF TEXAS (2010)

ON APPELLANT'S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

FROM THE FIRST COURT OF APPEALS HARRIS COUNTY

In addition to the considerations cited by the Court, I would add one based upon the language and structure of the statutes that existed in 1879.

Article 893 was contained in a title of the Code of Criminal Procedure named “Appeal and Writ of Error.” ¹  As the Court explains, article 893 provided that appeals in bond forfeiture proceedings-rather than being regulated by the provisions governing criminal cases-were to be regulated by the same rules that govern “other civil actions” where “an appeal is taken or a writ of error is sued out.” ²  The provisions that governed appeals and writs of error in civil cases were found in a chapter of the Revised Civil Statutes that was also entitled “Appeal and Writ of Error.” ³  Article 893's reference to the “same rules that govern the other civil actions where an appeal is taken or a writ of error is sued out” was clearly a reference to this Chapter.   And it is from Chapter 19 that the current Rules of Appellate Procedure are derived.⁴  Chapter 19 did not promulgate any filing fees,⁵ and neither do the current Rules of Appellate Procedure.⁶

I join the Court's opinion.

FOOTNOTES

FN1. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc., Title X (1879)..  FN1. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc., Title X (1879).

FN2. Id., art. 893..  FN2. Id., art. 893.

FN3. See Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat., Title XXIX, Chapter 19 (1879);  id., arts. 1380-1419..  FN3. See Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat., Title XXIX, Chapter 19 (1879);  id., arts. 1380-1419.

FN4. Compare id. and Tex.R.App. P., passim..  FN4. Compare id. and Tex.R.App. P., passim.

FN5. See Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat., arts. 1380-1419..  FN5. See Tex.Rev.Civ. Stat., arts. 1380-1419.

FN6. See Tex.R.App. P., passim..  FN6. See Tex.R.App. P., passim.

Keller, P.J., filed a concurring opinion in which Johnson, J., joined.