Week of September 21, 2026

Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued Week of September 21, 2026

NOTE: Summaries are prepared by the court's staff attorneys and law clerks for public information only and reflect his or her interpretation alone of the facts and legal issues. The summaries are not part of the court's opinion in the case and should not be cited to, quoted, or relied upon as the opinion of the court.

Links to full text of opinions (PDF version) can be accessed by clicking the cause number.

Ex parte Thomas, No. 02-26-00039-CR (Sept. 24, 2026) (Birdwell, J., joined by Sudderth, C.J., and Walker, J.).

Held:  A pro se appellant must comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure and will be held to the same standards as a licensed attorney. While an appellate court is required to liberally construe briefs, an appellant’s brief that fails to comply with Rule 38.1 presents nothing for review, and the issues may be overruled as inadequately briefed. Inadequate briefing is increasingly common when an appellant uses artificial intelligence to prepare his brief. Appellant’s brief fails to comply with Rule 38.1 because it does not contain clear and concise arguments and substantive analysis, with appropriate citations to authorities and to the record. Accordingly, Appellant has forfeited his complaints due to inadequate briefing.