Jose Guadalupe Carmona v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Jose Guadalupe Carmona v. State

DecidedMay 30, 2019

Docket14-19-00268-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Jose Guadalupe Carmona v. State (Jose Guadalupe Carmona 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

Jose Guadalupe Carmona v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Abatement Order filed May 30, 2019

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-19-00268-CR ____________

JOSE GUADALUPE CARMONA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1532290

ABATEMENT ORDER

The trial court failed to submit findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of appellant’s statement. Article 38.22, section 6 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure requires the trial court to make written fact findings and conclusions of law as to whether a challenged statement was made voluntarily, even if appellant did not request them or object to their absence. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.22 § 6 (Vernon 2005); Urias v. State, 155 S.W.3d 141, 142 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). The statute is mandatory and the proper procedure to correct the error is to abate the appeal and direct the trial court to make the required findings and conclusions. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.4; Wicker v. State, 740 S.W.2d 779, 784 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987).

Accordingly, the trial court is directed to reduce to writing its findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of appellant’s statement and have a supplemental clerk’s record containing those findings filed with the clerk of this court on or before July 1, 2019. If the trial court’s findings were dictated into the record, the trial court is directed to include those findings in a supplemental clerk’s record to be filed with the clerk of this court on or before July 1, 2019.

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.

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Abatement Order filed May 30, 2019

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-19-00268-CR ____________

JOSE GUADALUPE CARMONA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1532290

ABATEMENT ORDER

The trial court failed to submit findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of appellant’s statement. Article 38.22, section 6 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure requires the trial court to make written fact findings and conclusions of law as to whether a challenged statement was made voluntarily, even if appellant did not request them or object to their absence. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.22 § 6 (Vernon 2005); Urias v. State, 155 S.W.3d 141, 142 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). The statute is mandatory and the proper procedure to correct the error is to abate the appeal and direct the trial court to make the required findings and conclusions. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.4; Wicker v. State, 740 S.W.2d 779, 784 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987).

Accordingly, the trial court is directed to reduce to writing its findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of appellant’s statement and have a supplemental clerk’s record containing those findings filed with the clerk of this court on or before July 1, 2019. If the trial court’s findings were dictated into the record, the trial court is directed to include those findings in a supplemental clerk’s record to be filed with the clerk of this court on or before July 1, 2019.

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.

It is so ORDERED.

PER CURIAM

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jose Guadalupe Carmona v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jose-guadalupe-carmona-v-state-texapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack