Israel Gonzales v. State
This text of Israel Gonzales v. State (Israel Gonzales 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 13-18-00220-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________
ISRAEL GONZALES, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the 156th District Court of Bee County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________
ORDER OF ABATEMENT Before Justices Contreras, Longoria, and Hinojosa Order Per Curiam
Appellant, Israel Gonzales, has filed a notice of appeal with this Court from his
conviction in trial court cause number B-17-2164-0-CR-B. The trial court's certification
of the defendant's right to appeal shows that the defendant does not have the right to
appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). On April 23, 2018, we ordered appellant's counsel, Charles Manning, to, within
thirty days, review the record and advise this Court as to whether appellant has a right to
appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3, 44.4. No response to this Court's order has been
received. Therefore, we abate this appeal and remand this cause to the trial court for a
hearing to determine why counsel has failed to comply with this Court's order. The trial
court's findings and conclusions shall be included in a supplemental clerk's record. The
trial court shall file the supplemental clerk's record and reporter's record, if any, with the
Clerk of this Court within thirty days of the date of this order.
If the trial court determines that counsel is unable to represent appellant in this
matter, the trial court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether appellant desires to
prosecute the appeal, whether appellant is indigent, and whether appellant is entitled to
appointed counsel. See Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 83-84 (1988); Stafford v. State,
813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We further direct the trial court to issue
findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding these issues. Should the trial court find
that appellant desires to pursue this appeal, is indigent, and is entitled to appointed
counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel. If counsel is appointed, the name, address,
email address, telephone number, and state bar number of said counsel shall be included
in the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed this The 18th day of June, 2018.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Israel Gonzales v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/israel-gonzales-v-state-texapp-2018.