Darius Allen v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 24, 2022
Docket14-21-00419-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Darius Allen v. the State of Texas (Darius Allen 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
Darius Allen v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

Abatement order filed February 24, 2022.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-21-00419-CR ____________

DARIUS ALLEN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 174th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1551047

ABATEMENT ORDER

Appellant appeals his conviction for assault of a family member. Appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief in which counsel concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). We disagree with appellate counsel’s conclusion that there are no arguable issues for appeal. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744.1 Accordingly, the case is abated and remanded to the trial court with instructions for the trial court to appoint new counsel for appellant. The trial court clerk is ordered to prepare, certify, and file with the clerk of this court a supplemental clerk’s record containing that appointment within thirty (30) days of the date of this order.

The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court’s active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this court’s active docket when the supplemental clerk’s record is filed.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Spain, and Hassan.

1 Specifically, the Anders brief does not adequately address whether trial counsel was ineffective by failing to argue that being 25 minutes late for a scheduled virtual appointment with his community supervision officer during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic was not a failure to report that could justify revocation of community supervision. Our decision should not be viewed as a determination of the merits of any issues raised in the brief or a limitation on any issue that may be raised in this appeal. Appellant’s new appellate counsel should personally review the record to determine what issues should be raised in this appeal.

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

Related

Anders v. California
386 U.S. 738 (Supreme Court, 1967)
High v. State
573 S.W.2d 807 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Darius Allen v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darius-allen-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2022.