Belinda Dawn Tidwell v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 28, 2012
Docket01-12-00298-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Belinda Dawn Tidwell v. State (Belinda Dawn Tidwell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Belinda Dawn Tidwell v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

Order issued December 28, 2012

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-12-00298-CR ——————————— BELINDA DAWN TIDWELL, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 177th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1267425

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Appellant appeals her conviction for aggravated assault. Appellant’s retained counsel has filed a motion to withdraw pursuant to

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5 because counsel has reviewed the appellate

record and concluded that the appeal lacks merit and is frivolous.

Only an appointed counsel in a criminal appeal is required to file an Anders

brief if counsel determines that the appeal is without merit and is frivolous;

retained counsel is not required to do so. See Knotts v. State, 31 S.W.3d 821, 822

(Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, order); Nguyen v. State, 11 S.W.3d 376,

378 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, no pet.). A retained attorney, upon

determining that an appeal is frivolous, must so inform this Court and seek leave to

withdraw by filing a motion complying with Rule 6.5. See Knotts, 31 S.W.3d at

822; Nyuyen, 11 S.W.3d at 378.

Rule 6.5 requires that counsel, by copy of the motion, apprise appellant of

certain facts. See TEX. R. APP. P. 6.5(a)(1)-(4). Appellant’s retained counsel has

met the rule 6.5 requirements and certified to this Court that appellant has been

notified that she may exercise either (1) her right to retain other counsel, or (2) her

right to move for an extension of time to file a pro se brief. See Knotts, 31 S.W.3d

at 822.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Nyuyen, 11

S.W.3d at 379–80.

2 We notify appellant at her last known address, as provided in counsel's

motion, that her brief is due in this Court no later than 30 days from the date of this

order. Unless appellant retains counsel who files a brief on or before that date, or

unless by that date a motion for extension of time to file a pro se brief is filed in

this Court and granted, this appeal will be set for submission and considered by the

Court without briefs on the record alone.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Bland and Huddle.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Nguyen v. State
11 S.W.3d 376 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000)
Knotts v. State
31 S.W.3d 821 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Belinda Dawn Tidwell v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/belinda-dawn-tidwell-v-state-texapp-2012.