Jonathan Trujillo v. State
This text of Jonathan Trujillo v. State (Jonathan Trujillo 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
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
Nos. 06-13-00040-CR & 06-13-00041-CR
JONATHAN TRUJILLO, Appellant
V.
STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 8th District Court Hopkins County, Texas Trial Court Nos. 0920903 & 0921175
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. ORDER
Cynthia L. Braddy, counsel for the appellant, Jonathan Trujillo, has filed a motion to
extend time to file the appellant’s brief. The brief was due May 30, 2013.
In her motion, counsel does not provide the Court with a reasonable explanation of the
need for an extension of time. This Court interprets Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure
10.5(b)(2) as requiring counsel to provide the Court with specific information to justify the
requested extension, including the cause numbers of other briefs filed, the dates they were filed,
the dates of trials, how long those trials are expected to last, etc. Broad, general statements do
not provide the required facts and are not adequate to meet the requirements of the rule. See
TEX. R. APP. P. 10.5(b)(2).
All future motions to extend time must contain case-specific information adequate to
justify the request, or they will be denied.
In this instance, we grant the motion for an extension, for a period of thirty days, making
appellant’s brief now due July 1, 2013. Further requests for extensions will not be looked upon
with favor.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT
Date: June 11, 2013
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jonathan Trujillo v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jonathan-trujillo-v-state-texapp-2013.