David Preston Campbell v. State
This text of David Preston Campbell v. State (David Preston Campbell 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
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-11-00658-CR NO. 03-11-00659-CR
David Preston Campbell, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MILAM COUNTY, 20TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NOS. CR22,208 & CR22,209, HONORABLE JOHN YOUNGBLOOD, JUDGE PRESIDING
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM
In the above causes, appellant David Preston Campbell was convicted of the offenses
of burglary of a building and theft and, for each offense, was sentenced to 18 months’ confinement
in state jail, with the sentences to run concurrently. Campbell filed a notice of appeal from each
judgment of conviction. In each cause, appellant’s brief was due on March 25, 2013.
Instead of filing appellant’s brief, counsel for appellant has filed a motion to abate
the appeal in each cause. In the motions, counsel represents that Campbell has served the entirety
of his sentence and that the only issue on appeal that counsel intended to raise, whether Campbell
had received the appropriate amount of jail-time credit for his sentences, is now moot. Accordingly,
counsel intends to file a motion to dismiss the appeal in each cause. However, counsel further
represents that he has been unable to locate Campbell in order to obtain Campbell’s signature on the motions to dismiss. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a) (requiring appellant’s signature on motion to
voluntarily dismiss appeal in criminal case). Counsel asks that we abate the appeals in order to allow
counsel more time to locate his client.
In each cause, we grant counsel’s motion and abate the appeal. No later than June 10,
2013, counsel is ordered to file either a proper motion to dismiss the appeal or a status report
explaining why the motion to dismiss has not been filed. Because appellant’s brief remains overdue
at this time, failure to file a motion or status report by the deadline may result in referral of these
causes to the district court for a hearing pursuant to Rule 38.8. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b).
Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton and Rose
Abated
Filed: May 10, 2013
Do Not Publish
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
David Preston Campbell v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-preston-campbell-v-state-texapp-2013.