Brand v. State

OPINION

Richard W. Brand appeals a conviction for speeding. The jury found appellant guilty of speeding and assessed a $200.00 fine. Appellant has chosen to prosecute his appeal pro se. No statement of facts has been filed from the trial as the trial court has rejected appellant’s claim of “im-pecuniosity.” Appellant has filed a brief raising one point of error.

In his sole point of error, Brand contends he is “IMMUNE and EXEMPT” from payment of his fines imposed for his speeding offense. Brand’s reason for this immunity is his claim that Federal Reserve Notes are not “lawful money” of the…