Court of Civil Appeals of Texas, 2022

Lorenza Dondra Andrews v. the State of Texas

Lorenza Dondra Andrews v. the State of Texas
Court of Civil Appeals of Texas · Decided October 19, 2022

Lorenza Dondra Andrews v. the State of Texas

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-22-00033-CR

LORENZA DONDRA ANDREWS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 5th District Court Cass County, Texas Trial Court No. 2020F00251

Before Morriss, C.J., Stevens and van Cleef, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Stevens MEMORANDUM OPINION A Cass County jury convicted Lorenza Deondra Andrews of murder and recommended a sentence of sixty years’ imprisonment. The trial court sentenced Andrews in accordance with the jury’s recommendation, and Andrews timely filed a notice of appeal on March 11, 2022.

After filing that notice of appeal, Andrews died.

The Court of Criminal Appeals has stated, “We have long held that the death of the appellant during the pendency of his appeal deprives the court of jurisdiction[,] and the proper disposition is [permanment] abatement.”1 State v. McCaffrey, 76 S.W.3d 392, 392 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2002); see TEX. R. APP. P. 7.1(a)(2); Whitmire v. State, 943 S.W.2d 894, 895 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1997) (en banc) (per curiam).

Accordingly, we permanently abate this appeal.

Scott E. Stevens Justice Date Submitted: October 18, 2022 Date Decided: October 19, 2022 Do Not Publish

Appellant’s counsel filed a motion to dismiss this appeal due to Andrews’s death. We hereby deny that motion as dismissal and permanent abatement are separate and distinct dispositions. See Vargas v. State, 659 S.W.2d 422, 423 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) (en banc) (per curiam) (detailing why permanent abatement, rather than dismissal, is proper disposition when appellant dies while appeal is pending).

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