Dustin Lee Allen v. State
This text of Dustin Lee Allen v. State (Dustin Lee Allen 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. 07-06-0457-CR 07-06-0458-CR 07-06-0459-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL A
JANUARY 24, 2007 ______________________________
DUSTIN LEE ALLEN, APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE _________________________________
FROM THE 320TH DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;
NO. 49,984-D, 49,985-D, 53,537-D; HONORABLE DON R. EMERSON, JUDGE _______________________________
Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.
ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND
Appellant, Dustin Lee Allen, seeks appeal of his conviction in three cases. We
abate and remand for further proceedings.
In each case, appellant’s notice of appeal was presented to the trial court and
signed by appellant’s attorney, Timothy Pirtle. Since that time, our court has had no further
communication from appellant. Appellant has failed to file an adequate docketing
statement as required under Rule 32.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Further, the trial clerk’s office and the court reporter have both requested extensions of
time for filing of their respective records citing appellant’s failure to make a request for the
record or payment arrangements. 1 See TEX . R. APP. P. 34.5(b)(2), 34.6(b)(1), 35.3.
We now abate this cause and remand it to the 320th District Court of Potter County.
It is ordered that the judge of said court convene a hearing, after due notice to all parties,
to determine:
1) whether appellant desires to prosecute this appeal;
2) whether appellant continues to be represented by Timothy Pirtle or whether
counsel for appellant has abandoned the appeal;
3) if appellant is not represented by counsel, whether appellant is indigent and,
therefore, is entitled to appointed counsel and a record of the trial court proceedings free
of charge.
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 not represented by counsel and is indigent, we then further direct the
court to 1) appoint counsel to assist in the prosecution of the appeal, and 2) issue an order
requiring the preparation of a clerk's record in accordance with Rule 34.5 of the Texas
Rules of Appellate Procedure. The name, address, phone number, fax number, and state
1 The court reporter has graciously offered to prepare the reporter’s record upon a request from this Court. Without knowing whether appellant wishes to continue his appeal, we must decline the reporter’s invitation.
2 bar number of any counsel who is appointed to 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 all orders of the trial court issued as a result of
its hearing on this matter and 2) a reporter's record transcribing the evidence and
arguments presented at the aforementioned hearing. Additionally, the trial court shall
cause the supplemental records to be filed with the clerk of this court on or before February
26, 2007. Should additional time be needed to perform these tasks, the trial court may
request same on or before February 26, 2007.
It is so ordered.
Per Curiam
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Dustin Lee Allen v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dustin-lee-allen-v-state-texapp-2007.