Gevin Pierce v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: September 20, 2006
• Docket: 10-06-00111-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

 

No. 10-06-00111-CR

Gevin Pierce,

                                                                                    Appellant

 v.

The State of Texas,

                                                                                    Appellee

From the 227th District Court

Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2004-CR-8349

ABATEMENT ORDER

            Gevin Pierce appeals his murder conviction and 99-year prison sentence.  His trial counsel timely filed a “Jackson v. Denno Motion for Hearing on Voluntariness of Any Admission or Confession Whether Written or Oral,” seeking to suppress Pierce’s recorded and transcribed oral statement to police.  The trial court initially denied the motion, but then withdrew the ruling to give counsel an opportunity to brief the issues and tender proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.  No briefing or proposed findings and conclusions were filed.  During trial, defense counsel objected to testimony about Pierce’s statements and, in response to the trial court’s inquiry, mistakenly informed the trial court that it had denied the motion to suppress (the Jackson v. Denno motion).

            Pierce has now filed a motion to abate the appeal for a remand to the trial court for the entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law on his Jackson v. Denno motion.  When the voluntariness of a statement is challenged, the trial court is required to make written fact findings and conclusions of law on whether the challenged statement was made voluntarily.  Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.22, § 6 (Vernon 1979).  Article 38.22, section 6, is mandatory in its language and requires a trial court to file its findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the voluntariness of a confession whether or not the defendant objects to the absence of such omitted filing.  Urias v. State, 155 S.W.3d 141, 142 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004); Norton v. State, 156 S.W.3d 668, 669 (Tex. App.—Waco 2005, order); cf. Cullen v. State, 195 S.W.3d 696, 698-99 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).  Because the trial court did not make the required findings and conclusions, we abate this appeal for the trial court to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the voluntariness of Pierce’s written statement.

            The trial court shall, within thirty days after the date of this Order: (1) make appropriate orders and findings of fact and conclusions of law; and (2) deliver any orders and findings of fact and conclusions of law to the trial court clerk.

            The trial court clerk shall: (1) prepare a supplemental clerk’s record containing all orders and findings of fact and conclusions of law that the trial court renders or makes; and (2) file the supplemental clerk’s record with the Clerk of this Court within forty-five days after the date of this Order.

            Appellant’s brief will be due thirty days after the supplemental clerk’s record is filed.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Vance, and

Justice Reyna

Cause abated

Order issued and filed September 20, 2006

Do not publish