Israel Gonzales v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 18, 2018
Docket13-18-00220-CR
StatusPublished

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.

Bluebook
Israel Gonzales v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

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

Penson v. Ohio
488 U.S. 75 (Supreme Court, 1988)
Stafford v. State
813 S.W.2d 503 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Israel Gonzales v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/israel-gonzales-v-state-texapp-2018.