Allison Marie Tremblay v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: March 27, 2026
• Docket: 03-25-00490-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-25-00490-CR

Allison Marie Tremblay, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF COMAL COUNTY NO. 2022-CR-0939, THE HONORABLE CHARLES A. STEPHENS II, JUDGE PRESIDING

ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s brief was originally due December 22, 2025. The record indicates

that appellant has retained counsel, Brent de la Paz, and on February 5, 2026, this Court sent a

notice to Mr. de la Paz informing him that appellant’s brief was overdue and that a failure to file

a satisfactory response by February 17, 2026, could result in the referral of this case to the trial

court for a hearing under Rule 38.8(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. On

February 26, 2026, this Court received a notice of appearance from a second attorney,

Suzanne Kramer, seeking to appear as appellant’s counsel of record in this appeal. The Court

rejected the notice of appearance for failure to comply with Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.1(c).

See Tex. R. App. P. 6.1(c). On March 12, 2026, this Court sent a notice to Ms. Kramer

informing her that a failure to file a corrected notice of appearance as well as a motion of

extension of time or brief accompanied by a motion for extension of time could result in the referral of this case to the trial court for a hearing under Rule 38.8(b). To date, no response has

been received from either Mr. de la Paz or Ms. Kramer.

The appeal is abated and remanded to the trial court. The trial court shall conduct

a hearing to determine:

1. Whether appellant desires to prosecute this appeal;

2. Whether Mr. de la Paz has abandoned this appeal;

3. Whether Ms. Kramer has been retained to represent appellant in this appeal;

4. Whether Mr. de la Paz desires to be relieved of his duties as appellate counsel in light of Ms. Kramer’s representation, and if so, whether good cause exists to relieve Mr. de la Paz of his duties;

5. If Ms. Kramer is to be substituted for Mr. de la Paz as appellant’s counsel, whether appellant’s consent to the substitution properly has been obtained; and

6. Any additional issues the trial court finds material to ensure appellant receives effective assistance of counsel.

See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(2), (3); see also Alvarado v. State, 562 S.W.3d 450 (Tex. App.—

Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, order).

The court shall make appropriate written findings and recommendations. See

Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(2), (3). Following the hearing, which shall be transcribed, the trial court

shall order the appropriate supplemental clerk’s and reporter’s records—including all findings—

to be prepared and forwarded to this Court no later than April 10, 2026. See id. 38.8(b)(3).

It is so ordered March 27, 2026.

2 Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Theofanis and Crump

Abated and Remanded

Filed: March 27, 2026

Do Not Publish