Fritz Keith Peters v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 13, 2019
Docket07-19-00126-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Fritz Keith Peters v. State (Fritz Keith Peters 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.

Bluebook
Fritz Keith Peters v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-19-00126-CR

FRITZ KEITH PETERS, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

On Appeal from the 385th District Court Midland County, Texas Trial Court No. CR48226, Honorable Jeffrey Todd Robnett, Presiding

September 13, 2019

ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PARKER, JJ.

Appellant Fritz Keith Peters appeals his conviction for forgery of a financial

instrument. Appellant’s brief was due on August 12, 2019, but was not filed. By letter of

August 19, 2019, we notified appellant’s counsel that the brief was overdue and

admonished him that failure to file a brief by August 29 would result in the appeal being

abated and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. TEX. R. APP. P.

38.8(b)(2), (3). To date, appellant’s counsel has not filed a brief or had any further

communication with this court. Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court for further

proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall determine the following:

1. whether appellant still desires to prosecute the appeal;

2. whether appellant is indigent;

3. whether appellant has been denied the effective assistance of counsel due to counsel’s failure to timely file an appellate brief, see Ex parte Briggs, 187 S.W.3d 458, 467 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (holding “a reasonably competent attorney—regardless of whether he is retained or appointed—must seek to advance his client’s best defense in a reasonably competent manner”);

4. whether new counsel should be appointed; and

5. if appellant desires to continue the appeal, the final date on which appellant will file appellant’s brief.

The trial court is also directed to enter such orders necessary to address the

aforementioned questions. So too shall it include its findings on those matters in a

supplemental record and cause that record to be filed with this court by October 11, 2019.

If it is determined that appellant desires to proceed with the appeal, is indigent, and has

been denied the effective assistance of counsel, the trial court may appoint him new

counsel; the name, address, email address, and phone number of any new counsel

appointed shall be included in the aforementioned findings. Should further time be

needed to perform these tasks, then same must be requested before October 11, 2019.

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

Related

Ex Parte Briggs
187 S.W.3d 458 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Fritz Keith Peters v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fritz-keith-peters-v-state-texapp-2019.