writ). 32 . See Tex. Fam.Code Ann. § 161.001(1)(P). 33 . See id. § 161.001(1)(0). Apparently, the service plan is the only court order with which Kevin was required to comply. Wolfe could not recall whether Kevin had been ordered to pay child support, nor did she know whether a parent is ordinarily required to pay child support while incarcerated. 34 . See J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 265-66. 35 . Tex Fam.Code Ann. §§ 161.001, 161.206(a); G.M., 596 S.W.2d at 847. 36 . See M.S., 115 S.W.3d at 549. 37 . See id. at 545. 38 . Id. at 549. 39 . Id. at 549-50 (quoting Garcia v. State, 57 S.W.3d 436, 440 (Tex.Crim.App.2001), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1195, 123 S.Ct. 1351, 154 L.Ed.2d 1030 (2003)). 40 . See id. at 550. 41 . Id.; see also Horrocks v. Tex. Dep't of Transp., 852 S.W.2d 498, 498-99 (Tex.1993) (<HOLDING>). 42 . M.S., 115 S.W.3d at 550. 43 . In light
holding that if appellant preserves legal sufficiency complaint in motion for new trial new trial is all the relief appellate court can give because that is all the relief appellant requested in trial court holding where record fails to establish whether and how appellant presented motion for new trial to the trial court it was not timely presented holding appellants issue was rendered moot because appellant was given the opportunity to make a record in support of his motion for new trial and appellate court considered that record in disposing of only issue raised in the motion for new trial holding that appellant failed to preserve error because it did not present appellate complaint to trial court holding that motion for a new trial whether for guilt or punishment requires a valid legal claim a court cannot grant a new trial unless the defendant shows that he is entitled to one under the law