Hector Saul Rodriguez-Rodriguez v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 19, 2014
Docket01-13-00728-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Hector Saul Rodriguez-Rodriguez v. State (Hector Saul Rodriguez-Rodriguez 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
Hector Saul Rodriguez-Rodriguez v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2014).

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number: 01-13-00728-CR Style: Hector Saul Rodriguez-Rodriguez v The State of Texas * Date motion filed : February 18, 2014 Type of motion: Motion to Extend Time Party filing motion: Appellant Document to be filed: Appellant's Brief

If motion to extend time: Deadline to file document: February 24, 2014 Number of previous extensions granted: 1 Length of extension sought: 20 days

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted If document is to be filed, document due: February 24, 2014

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time  Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

Appellant’s brief was originally due on November 11, 2013. On November 26, 2013, appellant’s counsel filed a motion requesting an extension of 60 days to file his brief. We granted the motion and appellant’s brief was due on January 10, 2014. Appellant’s counsel failed to file a brief by that deadline, and this Court sent notice on February 5, 2014 that the time for filing appellant’s brief had expired. On February 18, 2014, appellant’s counsel filed the current motion requesting a further extension until February 24, 2014. This Court does not ordinarily grant extensions of time beyond 90 days from the original deadline for filing a brief. The motion for extension of time is granted, and appellant’s brief is due on February 24, 2014 with no further extensions absent extraordinary circumstances.

Judge's signature: /s/ Michael Massengale  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Panel consists of ______________________________.

Date: February 19, 2014

November 7, 2008 Revision

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Hector Saul Rodriguez-Rodriguez v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hector-saul-rodriguez-rodriguez-v-state-texapp-2014.