Ford, Frances Rosalez

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 1, 2015
DocketPD-0499-15
StatusPublished

This text of Ford, Frances Rosalez (Ford, Frances Rosalez) 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
Ford, Frances Rosalez, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

PD-0499-15 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

FRANCES R, FORD, ^Uftl UJ- CRWHNAt APPRl_

THE STATE OF TEXAS Abel Acosfra, Clerf' Appellee.

From the Fourth Court of Appeals of Texas No. 04-14-00025-CR HLED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS Trial Court Cause No. 2011-CR-2986 "^' ^120*5 The Honorable 227th Judicial District Court A. ,A Abel Acosta, Clerk Bexar County, Texas

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT'S PRO SE PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

Appellant FRANCES R. FORD, pro se, respectfully moves this

Court for a 90-day extension of time under Rule 10.5(b)(3),

Tex.R.App.Pro., to file her pro se petition for discretionary

review. Appellant submits the following facts relied on to

support the need for this extension of time:

A. The Fourth Judicial District Court of Appeals of San

Antonio, Texas, affirmed Appellant's judgement of conviction

on April 1, 2015. Ford v.. State, (No. 04-14-00025-CR, April

1, 2015)(Unpublished).

B. Appellate counsel did not file a rehearing or en banc. C Appellant's current deadline for filing her petition

for discretionary review is May 2, 2015.

D. Appellant requests a 90-day extension of time.

E. Appellant did not receive notice of the Court of Appeals'

affirmation until mid-April. Due to her current indigent status,

Appellant cannot afford retained counsel to assist her with

the preparation of a petition for discretionary review, and

will proceed pro se.

This additional time request is necessary because of

the limited time restraints of the use of the prison law library,

and the extension of time is necessary to conduct further caselaw

and statutory research to support the claims for review urged

in the petition for discretionary review.

This request is not for the purpose of delay, but is

based on legitimate grounds.

F. This is Appellant's first request for an extension of

time. A 90-day extension is not unreasonable due to the fact

that Appellant is serving a LIFE sentence, and the need for

the additional time will serve to assist in submitting a proper

petition for discretionary review.

This extension will not create a hardship or prejudice to

the State or the Court[s].

(2) Prayer

Appellant respectfully prays the Court to grant the above

request for extension of time and enter an order extending the

time for 90-days to file a petition for discretionary review

in this cause, making the petition due on or before July 31,

2015.

Appellant further prays for any other relief the Court deems

relevant to the disposition of this Motion.

Respectfully submitted,

. Ford, Appei; TDCJ-CID # 1916749/Crain Unit 1401 State School Rd., Gatesville, TX 76599

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify I have mailed a copy of the foregoing Motion

for Extension of Time to the parties for the State by placing

a copy in the U.S. Postal service, on this the 22nd day of April,

2015, first-class postage prepaid.

nranc.es R- Ford, Appellant

(3)

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ford, Frances Rosalez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-frances-rosalez-texapp-2015.