George Guadalupe Quintanilla v. State
This text of George Guadalupe Quintanilla v. State (George Guadalupe Quintanilla 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
NUMBER 13-18-00162-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
GEORGE GUADALUPE QUINTANILLA, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.
On Appeal from the 93rd District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.
ORDER OF ABATEMENT Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Longoria Order Per Curiam
Appellant, George Guadalupe Quintanilla, filed a notice of appeal with this Court
from his conviction in trial court cause number CR-1283-16-B. The trial court’s
certification of the defendant’s right to appeal does not contain the defendant’s signature.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). On March 23, 2018 and May 10, 2018, the Clerk of the Court requested that the trial court provide an amended certification of defendant’s right
of appeal containing the defendant’s signature, or alternatively, provide a response
explaining why it cannot be provided to the Court. The trial court has not provided a
response or an amended certification.
The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure require the trial court to enter a
certification of the defendant’s right of appeal in every case in which it enters a judgment
of guilt or other appealable order. See id. 25.2(a)(2). The certification must include a
notice that the defendant has been informed of his rights concerning an appeal, as well
as any right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. See id. 25.2(d). The
certification must be signed by the defendant and a copy must be given to him. See id.
25.2(d).
The record in this cause contains the trial court’s certification pursuant to TEX. R.
APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), but the certification is defective because it has not been signed by the
defendant. Accordingly, we direct the trial court to remedy the defect in the certification
by preparing and filing a “Trial Court’s Certification of Defendant’s Right of Appeal” which
includes the defendant’s signature. All of the provisions of 25.2(d) should be complied
with including the requirement that the defendant be informed of his rights concerning an
appeal, as well as any right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. The trial
court's amended certification, and any orders it enters shall be included in a supplemental
clerk's record. The trial court is directed to cause the supplemental clerk's record to be
filed with the Clerk of this Court within thirty days of the date of this order. Should the
trial court require more time to comply with the directions of this Court, it shall request an
2 extension prior to the expiration of this deadline.
It is so ORDERED.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed this the 5th day of June, 2018.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
George Guadalupe Quintanilla v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-guadalupe-quintanilla-v-state-texapp-2018.