Christopher Lee Cross v. State
This text of Christopher Lee Cross v. State (Christopher Lee Cross 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
NO. 07-05-0219-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL B
SEPTEMBER 27, 2005 ______________________________
CHRISTOPHER LEE CROSS,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee _________________________________
FROM THE 64th DISTRICT COURT OF HALE COUNTY;
NO. B15360-0402; HON. ROBERT W. KINKAID JR., PRESIDING _______________________________
ABATEMENT AND REMAND __________________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
Christopher Lee Cross (appellant), acting pro se, appeals his conviction for
possessing a controlled substance. The reporter’s record was filed on July 19, 2005, and
the clerk’s record was filed on August 4, 2005. Thus, appellant’s brief was due on
September 6, 2005. That date passed without appellant filing a brief, however. So, on
September 14, 2005, we notified appellant, by letter, that neither a brief nor an extension
of time to file one had been received by the court. Appellant was directed to either respond
to our notice or file a brief by September 26, 2005, otherwise the appeal would be abated
to the trial court. To date, we have yet to receive either a response or brief. Consequently, we abate the appeal and remand the cause to the 64th District Court
of Hale County (trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall
immediately cause notice of a hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing to
determine the following:
1. whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal; and
2. whether appellant is indigent and entitled to appointed counsel.
We further direct the trial court to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law
addressing the foregoing subjects. Should the trial court find that appellant desires to
pursue his appeal, is indigent, and has no counsel, then we further direct it to appoint
counsel to assist in the prosecution of the appeal. The name, address, phone number,
telefax number, and state bar number of the new counsel, if any, who will represent
appellant on appeal must also be included in the court’s findings of fact and conclusions
of law. Furthermore, the trial court shall also cause to be developed 1) a supplemental
clerk’s record containing the findings of fact and conclusions of law and 2) a reporter’s
record transcribing the evidence and argument presented at the aforementioned hearing.
Additionally, the trial court shall cause the supplemental clerk’s record to be filed with the
clerk of this court on or before October 27, 2005. Should additional time be needed to
perform these tasks, the trial court may request same on or before October 27, 2005.
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
Christopher Lee Cross v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-lee-cross-v-state-texapp-2005.