Jason Earle Wells v. State
This text of Jason Earle Wells v. State (Jason Earle Wells 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
NO. 07-09-0030-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL B
JUNE 3, 2009 ______________________________
JASON EARLE WELLS,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
_________________________________
FROM THE 26th DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY;
NO. 05-1399-K26; HON. BILLY RAY STUBBLEFIELD, PRESIDING _______________________________
ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND _______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.
Jason Earle Wells (appellant) appeals from his conviction for burglary of a
habitation. He filed his notice of appeal on October 27, 2008. The reporter’s record was
filed on February 2, 2009, and the clerk’s record on March 4, 2009. Appellant’s brief was
due on April 3, 2009. Neither a brief nor a motion for extension was filed by that date,
however. On April 13, 2009, the court sent a letter to appellant notifying him that the brief was overdue and that it or response was due on April 23, 2009. On April 20, 2009,
appellant filed a motion for extension of time to file the brief. It was granted, and the
deadline was extended to May 4, 2009. On May 11, 2009, this Court received appellant’s
second motion for extension of time and extended the deadline to May 26, 2009. At that
time we also told him that if the brief was not filed by that date, the appeal would be abated.
To date, no brief has been filed.
Consequently, we abate the appeal and remand the cause to the 26th District Court
(trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall immediately cause
notice of a hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing to determine the
following:
1. whether appellant is indigent;
2. whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal;
3. whether appellant has been denied the effective assistance of counsel due to appellate counsel’s failure to timely file an appellate brief. See Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387, 394, 105 S. Ct. 830, 834-35, 83 L. Ed.2d 821, 828 (1985) (holding that an indigent defendant is entitled to the effective assistance of counsel on the first appeal as of right and that counsel must be available to assist in preparing and submitting an appellate brief).
We further direct the trial court to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law
addressing the foregoing subjects. Should the trial court find that appellant desires to
pursue the appeal, is indigent, and has been denied effective assistance of counsel, we
further direct it to appoint new counsel to assist in the prosecution of the appeal. The
name, address, phone number, telefax number, and state bar number of the new counsel,
if any, who will represent appellant on appeal must also be included in the court’s findings
2 of fact and conclusions of law. Furthermore, the trial court shall also cause to be
developed 1) a supplemental clerk’s record containing the findings of fact and conclusions
of law and 2) a reporter’s record transcribing the evidence and argument presented at the
aforementioned hearing. Additionally, the trial court shall cause the supplemental clerk’s
record to be filed with the clerk of this court on or before July 3, 2009. Should additional
time be needed to perform these tasks, the trial court may request same on or before July
3, 2009.
It is so ordered.
Per Curiam
Do not publish.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jason Earle Wells v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jason-earle-wells-v-state-texapp-2009.