Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2011

Jacob Morales v. State

Jacob Morales v. State
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided March 24, 2011

Jacob Morales v. State

Opinion

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                             

                                       NUMBER 13-10-00403-CR

 

                                 COURT OF APPEALS

 

                     THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

                         CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

 

JACOB MORALES,                                                                       Appellant,

 

                                                             v.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                                                 Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

 

                            On appeal from the 36th District Court

of San Patricio County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

 

                                      MEMORANDUM OPINION

 

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides

                               Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

 

Appellant, Jacob Morales, was convicted of possession with intent to deliver cocaine.  On July 29, 2010, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.  Appellant’s appointed counsel in the trial court advised this Court that he was not retained or appointed to represent appellant on appeal.  On February 10, 2011, this Court abated the appeal and ordered the trial court to determine whether appellant desired to prosecute this appeal and whether appellant is indigent and entitled to court-appointed counsel.


At the trial court hearing, appellant stated that he did not wish to continue with his appeal and wanted to withdraw his appeal.  Appellant’s trial court counsel has filed motion to dismiss the appeal that does not contain the appellant’s signature.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2 (a).  Although no written motion has been filed in compliance with Rule 42.2(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we conclude that good cause exists to suspend the operation of Rule 42.2(a) in this case in accordance with Rule 2.  See Tex. R. App. P. 2.  Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED and the appeal is DISMISSED.    

 

PER CURIAM

 

Do not publish.

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 

Delivered and filed the

24th day of March, 2011.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

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