Carlos Vigil v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 20, 2010
Docket07-10-00367-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Carlos Vigil v. State (Carlos Vigil 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
Carlos Vigil v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

NO. 07-10-0367-CR NO. 07-10-0368-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

OCTOBER 20, 2010 ______________________________

CARLOS VIGIL,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

________________________________

FROM THE 251st DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

NOS. 57,173-C, 57,174-C; HON. ANA ESTEVEZ, PRESIDING _______________________________

ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND _______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Appellant appeals from his convictions for indecency with a child. Neither the clerk's record nor the reporter's records have been filed. Counsel for appellant has filed a motion to withdraw, stating that he has not been employed to represent appellant in these appeals. Counsel further states that appellant has filed an affidavit of indigence. Accordingly, we abate these appeals and remand the causes to the 251st District Court of Potter County (trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall determine, by reasonable evidentiary procedure it selects, the following: 1. whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeals; 2. whether appellant is indigent; and, if so, 3. whether the appellant is entitled to a free appellate record in each case and the appointment of an attorney due to his indigency.

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 (including the name, address, and phone number of any attorney it may appoint to represent appellant in these appeals) in a supplemental record in each case and cause those records to be filed with this court by November 19, 2010. Should further time be needed to perform these tasks, then same must be requested before November 19, 2010. In the meantime, all other appellate deadlines and counsel's motion to withdraw are stayed until further order of this court. 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 Per Curiam Do not publish.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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Carlos Vigil v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carlos-vigil-v-state-texapp-2010.