Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2008

Maurice Leslie v. State

Maurice Leslie v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided January 25, 2008

Maurice Leslie v. State

Opinion

NO. 07-08-0010-CR


IN THE COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


AT AMARILLO


PANEL A


JANUARY 25, 2008

______________________________


MAURICE LESLIE, APPELLANT


V.


THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________


FROM THE 52ND DISTRICT COURT OF CORYELL COUNTY;


NO. 18160; HONORABLE PHILLIP ZEIGLER, JUDGE

_______________________________




Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

Appellant, Maurice Leslie, acting pro se, appeals his conviction and sentence. A copy of a notice of appeal was filed with this Court on December 13, 2007. The clerk's record was filed on January 22, 2008. Included in the clerk's record is the trial court's certification of defendant's right of appeal, however, this certification is not signed by appellant. No reporter's record has been filed. We have received a request from appellant for appointment of counsel to represent him on appeal. We abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court to conduct a hearing and determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to appointment of counsel. In addition, we direct the trial court to amend its certification of defendant's right of appeal.

If, after hearing, the trial court should determine that appellant is indigent and still desires to pursue this appeal, then the trial court shall take such measures as may be necessary to assure appellant effective assistance of counsel, including appointment of counsel. If counsel is appointed, the name, address, telephone number, and state bar number of said counsel shall be included in the order appointing counsel. A copy of any order appointing counsel shall be immediately forwarded to the Clerk of this Court. Additionally, the trial court shall execute findings of fact, conclusions of law, and such orders as the court may enter regarding the aforementioned issues and cause its findings, conclusions, and any orders entered to be included in a supplemental clerk's record to be filed in this Court no later than Monday, March 3, 2008. A transcript of this hearing shall be prepared and filed in this Court as a supplemental reporter's record no later than Monday, March 3, 2008.

Further, the trial court's certification of defendant's right of appeal, included in the clerk's record, is not signed by appellant. As such, this certification does not comply with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d), which has been amended, effective September 1, 2007, to require that the certification be signed by appellant and that a copy be served on him. Thus, on remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means it finds necessary to obtain appellant's signature on an amended trial court's certification and that such amended certification be served on appellant. The amended certification, any other orders, and a transcript of any hearings held on this matter shall be made part of the supplemental clerk's record and the supplemental reporter's record ordered above and shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court by March 3, 2008.



Per Curiam

Do not publish.

se" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>

NO. 07-10-00433-CV

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

AT AMARILLO

 

PANEL A

 

JANUARY 27, 2011

 

 

CARMEX AUTO SALES, APPELLANT

 

v.

 

EUSEBIO RODRIGUEZ AND ESTELA CANEZ, APPELLEE

 

 

 FROM THE 84TH DISTRICT COURT OF HUTCHINSON COUNTY;

 

NO. 38,083; HONORABLE WILLIAM D. SMITH, JUDGE

 

 

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

 

 

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

 

Appellant, Chriscella Mariscal d/b/a Carmex Auto Sales, has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal because he no longer desires to pursue it.  No decision of this Court having been delivered to date, we grant the motion.  Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1).  All costs related to this appeal are assessed against appellant.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d).  If dismissal will prevent appellees from seeking relief to which they would otherwise be entitled, the Court directs appellees to file a timely motion for rehearing.  No motion for rehearing from appellant will be entertained.

                                                                                                Mackey K. Hancock

                                                                                                            Justice

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.