Karen Wooding Bryant v. State

464 S.W.3d 99, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 3352, 2015 WL 1622163
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided April 7, 2015·No. NO. 14-13-00922-CR·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM

A jury convicted appellant of the misdemeanor offense of assault of a family member. On September 12, 2013, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for one year in the Harris County Jail and assessed á fine of $4,000. The trial court probated the sentence and placed appellant on community supervision for nine months. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal,

The reporter’s record from the trial was due on or before November 11,2013. Sondra Humphrey, the substitute court reporter responsible for the record in this case, has not filed the reporter’s record from the trial.

On April 10, 2014, we abated the appeal and directed the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the record. The Hon. Sherman A. Ross, the former Presiding Judge of the Harris County Criminal Courts at Law, was. assigned to hear the.proeeedings regarding the. past due reporter’s records taken by Sondra Humphrey in this case and eight other cases pending in both this court and the 'Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 74.056 (West 2013). Judge Ross issued many orders and conducted numerous hearings to assist the appellate courts in obtaining the reporter’s records in these cases. After it became apparent that Ms.' Humphrey was unable to provide a complete record in this case, Judge Ross ordered Ms. Humphrey to provide the court with her computerized stenographic notes and an audio recording of the trial so that another court reporter could attempt to complete the record. After much delay, Ms. Humphrey’s notes and an audio recording in this case were delivered to the *101 court. Judge Ross appointed another court reporter to attempt to- reconstruct the record, but that court reporter was unable to do so. After finding that Ms. Humphrey violated several of the court’s orders, Judge Ross held her in contempt of court. On August 15, 2014, Judge Ross sentenced Ms. Humphrey to confinement for 30 days in the Harris County Jail and assessed a $500 fine.

Records from several hearings conducted by Judge Ross were filed in this court. In addition, counsel for the State submitted proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law concerning the status of the records for this case and eight other cases reported by Ms. Humphrey. Based upon these records and the State’s proposed findings and conclusions, it appeared that the reporter’s record in this appeal may have been “lost or destroyed” for purposes of appeal.

On November 20, 2014, this court issued an order directing Judge Ross to make and file findings of fact and conclusions of law concerning whether appellant is entitled to a new trial, as required under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(f). Rule 34.6(f) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, entitled “Reporter’s Record Lost of Destroyed,” provides that an appellant is entitled to a new trial when the reporter’s record or exhibits are lost, under the following circumstances:

(1) if the appellant timely requested a reporter’s record;
(2) if, without the appellant’s fault, a significant exhibit or a significant portion of the court reporter’s notes and records has been lost or destroyed or— if the proceedings were electronically recorded—a significant portion of the recording has been lost or destroyed or is inaudible;
(3) if the lost, destroyed, or inaudible portion of the reporter’s record, or the lost or destroyed exhibit, is ’necessary to the appeal’s resolution; and
(4)if the lost, destroyed or inaudible portion of the- reporter’s record cannot be replaced by agreement of the parties, or the lost' or destroyéd exhibit cannot be replaced- either by agreement of the parties or with a copy determined by the trial court to accurately duplicate with reasonable certainty the. original exhibit.

Tex. R. App. P. 34.6 (f).

The. Texas Court .of Criminal Appeals has determined that an incomplete record does not result in an automatic reversal under the 1997 amended appellate rules. See Issac v. State, 989 S.W.2d 754, 756 (Tex.Crim.App.1999). Instead, a harm analysis is required when considering a missing or incomplete reporter’s record. Id. at 757. The provision in Rule 34.6 requiring an appellant to show that the missing portion of the record is necessary to her appeal is essentially a requirement that the appellate court perform a harm analysis. Nava v. State, 415 S.W.3d 289, 306 (Tex.Crim.App.2013) (citing Routier v. State, 112 S.W.3d 554, 571 (Tex.Crim.App.2003)). If the missing portion .of the record is not necessary to the appeal’s resolution, then the loss of that portion of the record is harmless and a new trial is not required. Routier, 112 S.W.3d at 571-72; Issac, 989 S.W.2d at 757.

On March 3, 2015, Judge Ross filed findings of fact and conclusion^ of law, which were made part of a supplemental clerk’s record filed March 11, 2015. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered reinstated. Included in the trial court’s findings of fact were the following:

At the request of the parties, the undersigned judge directed Brenna DeMoss, official court reporter for County Criminal Court at Law No. 11 of Harris County, Texas, to review the audio files, and *102 stenographic notes submitted to ■ the Court by Ms. Humphrey.
Ms. DeMoss could not reconstruct a complete reporter’s record based upon the audio and stenographic notes submitted to the Court by Ms. Humphrey.
Ms. Humphrey’s medical condition, personal, and professional problems during the latter part of 2013, and early -2014, up to-and including the contempt hearings [in this case and eight other cases] indicate she may not have been in a condition to'transcribe the proceedings, or otherwise conduct herself in a professional manner.
The appellant timely filed a notice of appeal.
This case did not involve a waiver of a court reporter, nor was it a mere formality or summary proceeding.
The appellant bears no fault for Ms. Humphrey’s failure .to complete and file the reporter’s record.
The reporter’s record is necessary to the appeal’s resolution.
The reporter’s record cannot be replaced by agreement of the parties to the facts contained in the record, if [no] complete and legible record exists.
The exhibits or copies of’the exhibits are available.'

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

Karen Wooding Bryant v. State, 464 S.W.3d 99, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 3352, 2015 WL 1622163 (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

464 S.W.3d 99 (Karen Wooding Bryant v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Drayton Joel Eaglin v. the State of Texas
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Robert Howard Green v. the State of Texas
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2022
Dylan Andrew Quick v. State
557 S.W.3d 775 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2018)
Johnson v. State
524 S.W.3d 338 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2017)
Rudy Matamoros, Jr. v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015
Victor Charles Bankett v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015
Luis Sanchez Acosta v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015
Israel Castillo v. State
510 S.W.3d 32 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015)