Lacie Dee Pardun v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 3, 2017
Docket05-16-00792-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Lacie Dee Pardun v. State (Lacie Dee Pardun 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
Lacie Dee Pardun v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

Order entered February 3, 2017

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-16-00792-CR

LACIE DEE PARDUN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 366th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 366-83652-2015

ORDER Appellant’s brief was due November 5, 2016. By postcard dated November 8, 2016, we

notified appellant the brief was overdue and directed her to file the brief and an extension motion

within ten days. On November 16, 2016, appellant filed a motion to extend time which we

granted, extending the due date to December 5, 2016. Appellant filed another motion to extend

time, making her brief due January 6, 2017. To date, no brief has been filed and we have had no

communication from appellant.

Therefore, we ORDER the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why appellant’s

brief has not been filed. Specifically, the trial court shall make appropriate findings and

recommendations and determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, whether

appellant is indigent, or if not indigent, whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b). If the trial court cannot obtain appellant’s presence at the hearing, the

trial court shall conduct the hearing in appellant’s absence. See Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708

(Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.) (per curiam). If appellant is indigent, the trial court is

ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which

may include appointment of new counsel.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record of the proceedings, which shall include

written findings and recommendations, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this

order.

This appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with the above order. The

appeal shall be reinstated thirty 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

Related

Meza v. State
742 S.W.2d 708 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lacie Dee Pardun v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lacie-dee-pardun-v-state-texapp-2017.