Benito Cruz Ramirez v. State
This text of Benito Cruz Ramirez v. State (Benito Cruz Ramirez 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.
Opinion
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
No. 07-19-00208-CR
BENITO CRUZ RAMIREZ, APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
On Appeal from the 119th District Court Concho County, Texas Trial Court No. DSM-18-02011, Honorable Ben Woodward, Presiding
December 17, 2019
ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE and PARKER, JJ.
Appellant Benito Cruz Ramirez appeals his conviction for possession of a
controlled substance with the intent to deliver. Appellant’s brief was originally due
September 18, 2019. We subsequently granted appellant’s counsel three extensions to
file a brief. By letter of November 19, 2019, we notified appellant’s counsel that if the brief
was not filed by December 2, the appeal would be abated and the cause remanded to
the trial court for further proceedings. TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(2), (3). On December 2,
2019, appellant’s counsel filed a motion seeking an extension until December 6 to file the brief. To date, counsel has not filed appellant’s brief or had any further communication
with this Court.
Accordingly, we deny appellant’s motion for extension, abate the appeal, and
remand the cause to the trial court for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court
shall determine the following:
1. whether appellant still desires to prosecute the appeal;
2. whether appellant is indigent;
3. whether appellant has been denied the effective assistance of counsel due to counsel’s failure to timely file an appellate brief, see Ex parte Briggs, 187 S.W.3d 458, 467 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding “a reasonably competent attorney—regardless of whether he is retained or appointed—must seek to advance his client’s best defense in a reasonably competent manner”);
4. whether new counsel should be appointed; and
5. if appellant desires to continue the appeal, the final date on which appellant will file appellant’s brief.
The trial court is also directed to enter such orders necessary to address the
aforementioned questions. So too shall it include its findings on those matters in a
supplemental record and cause that record to be filed with this Court by January 10, 2020.
If it is determined that appellant desires to proceed with the appeal, is indigent, and has
been denied the effective assistance of counsel, the trial court may appoint him new
counsel; the name, address, email address, and phone number of any new counsel
appointed shall be included in the aforementioned findings. Should further time be
needed to perform these tasks, then same must be requested before January 10, 2020.
It is so ordered.
Per Curiam
Do not publish.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Benito Cruz Ramirez v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benito-cruz-ramirez-v-state-texapp-2019.