Billy Kipkorir Chemirmir v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 14, 2022
Docket05-22-00418-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Billy Kipkorir Chemirmir v. the State of Texas (Billy Kipkorir Chemirmir v. the State of Texas) 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
Billy Kipkorir Chemirmir v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

Order entered December 14, 2022

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-22-00418-CR

BILLY KIPKORIR CHEMIRMIR, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 203rd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F-1875401-P

ORDER

Appellant’s brief is overdue. The brief was due October 21, 2022. We

notified appellant’s counsel on October 26, 2022, by postcard that the brief was

overdue and directed counsel to file within ten days both appellant’s brief and an

extension motion. We cautioned counsel that if the brief and an extension motion

were not filed, we would order the trial court to conduct a hearing. As of the date

of this order, neither the brief nor an extension motion have been filed. The Court ORDERS the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why

appellant’s brief has not been filed. In this regard, the trial court shall make

appropriate findings and recommendations and determine whether appellant

desires to prosecute the appeals, whether appellant is indigent, or if not indigent,

whether counsel has abandoned the appeals. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the

trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the trial court shall

conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the

trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure

effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which

shall include written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY

DAYS of the date of this order.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above

order. The appeal shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or

when the findings are received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE

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

Related

Meza v. State
742 S.W.2d 708 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Billy Kipkorir Chemirmir v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/billy-kipkorir-chemirmir-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2022.