Charles Deon Matthews v. State
Opinion
Opinion issued June 27, 2013
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
which appellant appeared with his retained counsel. A supplemental clerk’s record and a reporter’s record of the hearing have been filed, and we have reinstated the appeal.
The hearing record reflects that the trial court explained to appellant his appellate rights and explained that he may be entitled to appointed counsel. Appellant stated on the record in open court that he had consulted with counsel and that he wished to withdraw his appeal. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court found that appellant does not wish to prosecute the appeal. In addition, the supplemental clerk’s record reflects that, on the day of the hearing, appellant filed a “Notice of Waiver of Appeal,” which is signed by appellant and his counsel.
Appellant has not filed a motion in this Court to withdraw the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). Given appellant’s expressed desire on the record in open court to forego pursuit of his appeal, however, we conclude that good cause exists to suspend the operation of Rule 42 in this case, in accordance with Rule 2. See TEX. R. APP. P. 2, 42; Conners v. State, 966 S.W.2d 108, 110–11 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 1998, pet. ref’d). We have not yet issued a decision in the appeal.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f). We dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Bland. Do not publish.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
Charles Deon Matthews v. State (Charles Deon Matthews v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.