Legal Opinion

In Re One Man's Rolex Watch Yellow Gold

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)

Decided April 18, 2006No. 07-05-0165-CVPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BRIAN QUINN, Chief Justice.

Omar Mendoza appeals from a post-answer default judgment forfeiting his interest in a Rolex watch, gold bracelet, and gold ring. The forfeiture occurred under the auspices of Chapter 59 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mendoza contends that the default judgment should be reversed because he 1) was afforded no notice or was denied sufficient notice of the trial and 2) was denied the ability to obtain a record of the forfeiture hearing since the proceeding was not memorialized. We address only the second issue for it is dispos-itive and, upon addressing it,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rogers v. RogersTexas Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Sharif v. Par Tech, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2004
  3. Chase Bank of Texas, N.A. v. Harris County Water Control & Improvement District 109, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2000
  4. in the Interest of K.B.A., B.W.A., and D.J.A., Children, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2004
  5. Gilley v. AnthonyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1966

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. $43,774.00 U.S. Currency v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2008
  2. Regenia Bechem v. Reliant Energy Retail Services, LLC and Comerica Bank, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2014
  3. $130,510.00 in U.S. Lawful Currency v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2008
  4. $130,510.00 in U. S. Lawful Currency v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2008
  5. $43,774.00 U.S. Currency and 1997 Model Pontiac Grand Prix, Vin 1G2WP12K7VF323349 v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2008

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API