Brandy Dawn Todd v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 28, 2025
Docket03-24-00659-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Brandy Dawn Todd v. the State of Texas (Brandy Dawn Todd 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
Brandy Dawn Todd v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-24-00659-CR

Brandy Dawn Todd, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 51ST DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY NO. A-24-0184-SB, THE HONORABLE CARMEN DUSEK, JUDGE PRESIDING

ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant Brandy Dawn Todd has filed a notice of appeal from her conviction for

possession of methamphetamine in an amount of four grams or more but less than 200 grams.

See Tex. Health & Safety Code § 481.112(d). Todd’s appointed appellate counsel,

Madison Hagopian, has filed a motion to substitute Don Payne as counsel in the above cause. In

her motion, Hagopian advises this Court that she can no longer represent Todd because of a

change of employment.

The trial court has the responsibility for appointing counsel to represent indigent

defendants on appeal as well as the authority to relieve or replace appointed counsel upon a

finding of good cause. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arts. 1.051(d), 26.04(j)(2). Accordingly,

when counsel is appointed by the trial court to represent an indigent defendant on appeal, it is the trial court’s responsibility to relieve or replace counsel. See Alvarado v. State, 562 S.W.3d 450,

450–51 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet.); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907

(Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Williamson v. State, No. 03-12-00672-CR, 2013 WL 363677,

at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

We therefore dismiss counsel’s motion to substitute, abate the appeal, and remand

the above cause to the trial court. If the trial court determines that good cause exists for

replacing counsel with substitute counsel, the trial court shall remove counsel and promptly

appoint substitute counsel for the appeal of this cause.

The trial court clerk is instructed to file with this Court no later than

March 14, 2025, a supplemental clerk’s record containing copies of the court’s order appointing

substitute counsel and the court’s order allowing counsel’s removal. If the trial court appoints

substitute counsel, he shall file Todd’s brief within thirty days of appointment.

It is so ordered February 28, 2025.

Before Justices Triana, Theofanis, and Crump

Abated and Remanded

Filed: February 28, 2025

Do Not Publish

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

Related

Enriquez v. State
999 S.W.2d 906 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Julio Alvarado v. State
562 S.W.3d 450 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Brandy Dawn Todd v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brandy-dawn-todd-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.