Horace Joseph Randolph II v. State
This text of Horace Joseph Randolph II v. State (Horace Joseph Randolph II 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
Abatement Order filed October 11, 2018
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________
NO. 14-18-00647-CR ____________
HORACE JOSEPH RANDOLPH II, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 458th District Court Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 15-DCR-068193
ABATEMENT ORDER
Appellant is represented by retained counsel, Lee D. Cox The reporter’s record has not been filed in this appeal. Court reporter Tiffany Pino Newell has informed the court that appellant has not paid or made arrangements to pay the reporter’s fee to prepare the reporter’s record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c)(2)(A). This court is unaware whether appellant is entitled to proceed without the payment of costs. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c)(2)(B). Accordingly, we enter the following order. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c). We ORDER the judge of the 458th District Court to immediately conduct a hearing at which appellant, appellant’s counsel, and counsel for the State shall participate, either in person or by video teleconference, to determine whether appellant desires to prosecute his appeal, and, if so, whether appellant is indigent and, thus entitled to a free record and appointed counsel on appeal. The judge may appoint appellate counsel for appellant if necessary. The judge shall see that a record of the hearing is made, shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law, and shall order the trial clerk to forward a record of the hearing and a supplemental clerk’s record containing the findings and conclusions. The transcribed record of the hearing and the court’s findings and conclusions shall be filed with the clerk of this court by November 13, 2018.
The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court’s active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this court’s active docket when the trial court’s findings and recommendations are filed in this court. The court will also consider an appropriate motion to reinstate the appeal filed by either party, or the court may reinstate the appeal on its own motion. It is the responsibility of any party seeking reinstatement to request a hearing date from the trial court and to schedule a hearing in compliance with this court’s order. If the parties do not request a hearing, the court coordinator of the trial court shall set a hearing date and notify the parties of such date.
If the reporter’s record is filed on or before November 13, 2018, no hearing need be held.
PER CURIAM
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Horace Joseph Randolph II v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/horace-joseph-randolph-ii-v-state-texapp-2018.