Lauren Ashley Adetunji v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 31, 2012
Docket14-11-00778-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Lauren Ashley Adetunji v. State (Lauren Ashley Adetunji 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
Lauren Ashley Adetunji v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

Motion Granted; Abatement Order filed January 31, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-11-00778-CR ____________

LAUREN ASHLEY ADETUNJI, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 3 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1715891

ABATEMENT ORDER

On January 13, 2012, appellant filed a motion requesting that we abate the appeal and direct the trial court to file findings of fact and conclusions of law related to its ruling on appellant’s pre-trial motion to suppress evidence. The State filed no objection or other response. Upon the request of the losing party on a motion to suppress evidence, the trial court shall state its essential findings of fact and conclusions of law that are adequate to provide an appellate court with a basis upon which to review the trial court’s application of the law to the facts. See State v. Cullen, 195 S.W.3d 696, 699 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we GRANT appellant’s motion and issue the following order: The presiding judge of the Harris County Criminal Court at Law No. 3 is directed to reduce to writing its findings of fact and conclusions of law that are adequate to provide this court with a basis upon which to review the trial court’s application of the law to the facts. The trial court is directed to have a supplemental clerk’s record containing those findings and conclusions filed with the clerk of this Court on or before March 2, 2012. 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.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Jamison and McCally.

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

Related

State v. Cullen
195 S.W.3d 696 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lauren Ashley Adetunji v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lauren-ashley-adetunji-v-state-texapp-2012.