Julius Erick Knight v. State
This text of Julius Erick Knight v. State (Julius Erick Knight 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
Order entered September 8, 2016
In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00249-CR
JULIUS ERICK KNIGHT, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 1 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MA-1651546-A
ORDER A review of this record shows the clerk’s record has not been filed. Therefore, we
ORDER the Dallas County District Clerk to file, within TEN DAYS of the date of this order,
the clerk’s record for cause no. 05-16-00249-CR (trial court no. MA-1651546-A).
The Court has before it appellant’s September 2, 2016 motion to abate the appeal to
determine the status of the reporter’s record from the punishment phase. The motion notes that
appellant has contacted Vicki Tuck about the record but, to date, no response has been given.
Therefore, the Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether a
reporter’s record of the punishment phase of trial exists. Specifically:
• The trial court shall determine whether a record was made of the punishment proceeding in this case. If no record was made, the trial court shall determine whether the recording was waived. In addition, if no record was made, the trial court shall determine whether punishment was based on an agreement with the State.
• If a recording was made, the trial court shall determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who recorded the punishment phase in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can be filed.
We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact,
any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within TWENTY DAYS of the date
of this order.
The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal
shall be reinstated twenty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received,
whichever is earlier.
/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Julius Erick Knight v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/julius-erick-knight-v-state-texapp-2016.