Background
Brytavion Rogers appealed five judgments of conviction in two cause numbers for which his sentences were imposed by the trial court on January 21, 2026. The appeals were taken from the 361st District Court of Brazos County, Texas, where Judge David G. Hilburn presided. The trial court cause numbers were 24-01828-CRF-361 and 24-01829-CRF-361, and the appellate cause numbers were 10-26-00074-CR and 10-26-00075-CR.
On October 30, 2026, Rogers filed a voluntary motion to dismiss the appeal in each appeal. The memorandum opinion states that the motions in each appeal were signed by Rogers and his attorney, and it cites Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) in connection with both the filing and the signatures. The opinion does not describe the underlying offenses, the length or terms of the sentences, the issues Rogers had raised or intended to raise on appeal, or any response by the State.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted the motions and dismissed the appeals. The operative disposition states: “Rogers’s motions to dismiss these appeals are granted. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed.” The citation following that sentence is “Id.,” referring back to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a).
The opinion is a memorandum opinion delivered by Chief Justice Johnson for the Court. The “Before” line identifies the panel as Chief Justice Johnson, Justice Harris, and Justice Westerfeld. The signature block identifies Matt Johnson as Chief Justice. The opinion was delivered and filed on November 5, 2026, and the docket notations read “Appeals dismissed,” “Motions granted,” and “Do not publish.”
The opinion contains no merits analysis. It does not discuss the five convictions, any sentencing issue, any evidentiary or legal question, or any standard of review. Its only stated basis is that Rogers filed a voluntary motion to dismiss the appeal in each appeal, that the motions were signed by Rogers and his attorney, and that Rule 42.2(a) was cited. The court then granted the motions and dismissed the appeals.
Key Takeaways
- Rogers appealed five judgments of conviction in two cause numbers; the opinion does not say the appeals were consolidated, only that he filed a motion in each appeal.
- Each motion was voluntary and was signed by both Rogers and his attorney, with the opinion citing Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a).
- The court granted the motions and dismissed the appeals; the opinion does not state a mandatory or universal rule that every signed motion must be granted.
- The document is a memorandum opinion marked “Do not publish,” and it supplies no reasoning on the merits of the convictions or sentences.
Why It Matters
This is a brief, outcome-only memorandum opinion. Its practical significance is limited to what the document actually shows: a criminal appellant who had perfected appeals from five convictions in two cause numbers voluntarily sought dismissal in each appeal, the motions were signed by both the appellant and counsel, and the court granted them and dismissed the appeals. For attorneys tracking appellate practice in the Tenth Court of Appeals, the opinion illustrates the court’s handling of a voluntary dismissal request under Rule 42.2(a) as presented on these facts.
Because the opinion contains no substantive discussion, it should not be read as addressing the validity of the convictions, the sentences imposed on January 21, 2026, or any issue that might have been raised on appeal. Nor should it be cited for any proposition beyond its stated disposition. The “Do not publish” notation further signals that the court treated the matter as resolved by the parties’ own filing rather than by precedential adjudication.