Jose Villagran v. the State of Texas
This text of Jose Villagran v. the State of Texas (Jose Villagran v. the State of Texas) 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
FILE COPY
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas July 21, 2022
No. 04-22-00261-CR
Jose VILLAGRAN, Appellant
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2021CR3653B Honorable Melisa C. Skinner, Judge Presiding
ORDER On July 11, 2022, appellant filed a motion seeking to substitute attorney Daniel De La Garza “for counsel in place and instead of” appellant’s current attorney, Eduardo Jimenez. The motion, which satisfies the requirements of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.5, states that it was filed “in order that the record reflect Appellant’s duly retained counsel of record.” Accordingly, we GRANT the motion and ORDER: (1) attorney Eduardo Jimenez withdrawn as counsel for appellant; and (2) attorney Daniel De La Garza substituted as attorney for appellant.
_________________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 21st day of July, 2022.
___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jose Villagran v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jose-villagran-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2022.