Lavena v. Hightower v. State
This text of Lavena v. Hightower v. State (Lavena v. Hightower 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
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON
ORDER ON MOTION
Cause number: 01-13-01023-CV Style: Lavena V. Hightower v. The State of Texas Date motion filed: May 7, 2014 Type of motion: Motion to Withdraw and Substitute Counsel Party filing motion: Amanda E. Love, counsel for appellant Document to be filed:
Is appeal accelerated? No
If motion to extend time: Original due date: Number of previous extensions granted: Current Due date: Date Requested:
Ordered that motion is:
Granted If document is to be filed, document due: Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time Denied Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot) Other: Amanda E. Love’s motion to withdraw as appellant’s counsel is granted, and Kathryn Lewis and Beth Mitchell are substituted as appellant’s counsel.
Judge’s Signature: /s/ Jim Sharp
Date: May 29, 2014
November 7, 2008 Revision
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Lavena v. Hightower v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lavena-v-hightower-v-state-texapp-2014.