Reginald Donell Rice v. Texas Department of Criminal Justice

Summary

The Thirteenth Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the dismissal without prejudice of Reginald Donell Rice’s inmate lawsuit against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The court held that dismissal was proper under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Chapter 14 because Rice’s affidavit of indigence contained false information and his trust-account records showed that he was not indigent. The court also rejected Rice’s procedural challenges and denied his motion to waive appellate fees.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Rice's lawsuit under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 14.003 because Rice had funds in his inmate trust account and his affidavit contained false information concerning his monthly income and indigence.
2. Rice did not establish reversible error based on the alleged failure to serve him with the attorney general's amicus brief because section 14.003 does not require a party's motion before dismissal and the dismissal may occur before or after service.
3. Rice failed to establish that Judge Johnson's assignment was improper because the record showed that Judge Harle, the Presiding Judge of the Fourth Judicial Region, appointed Judge Johnson, and Rice identified no legal basis for challenging the assignment.
4. The dismissal order was not required to comply with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 145 because the dismissal was entered under section 14.003, which permits pre-service dismissal without a hearing. Rice also waived findings of fact and conclusions of law by failing to request them within twenty days after judgment was signed.
5. Rice's motion to waive appellate fees was denied because the funds in his inmate trust account established that he was not indigent.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court properly dismissed Rice's inmate lawsuit under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 14.003 based on a false allegation of poverty and nonindigent status.
2. Whether dismissal was procedurally improper because Rice was not served with the attorney general's amicus curiae brief requesting dismissal.
3. Whether the assignment of Judge Johnson to the case was improper.
4. Whether the dismissal order was defective because it lacked reasoning under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 145 or findings of fact and conclusions of law under Rules 296 and 297.
5. Whether Rice was entitled to waiver of appellate fees based on indigence.

Disposition

affirmed