Luis Felipe Maturino-Rodriguez v. the State of Texas
This text of Luis Felipe Maturino-Rodriguez v. the State of Texas (Luis Felipe Maturino-Rodriguez v. the State of Texas) 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
In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo ________________________
No. 07-21-00189-CR ________________________
LUIS FELIPE MATURINO-RODRIGUEZ, APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE
On Appeal from the 287th District Court Parmer County, Texas Trial Court No. 3712 (Counts I & II); Honorable Gordon H. Green, Presiding
April 19, 2022
ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE and DOSS, JJ.
Appellant, Luis Felipe Maturino-Rodriguez, appeals his two convictions for
indecency with a child 1 and concurrent sentences of eleven years confinement, plus the
assessment of a statutory fine of $100.00 in each case. Because Appellant’s appointed
1 See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 21.11. counsel has failed to file an appellate brief, we remand the cause to the trial court for
further proceedings.
Appellant’s brief was originally due February 7, 2022, but we granted Appellant’s
counsel, James Johnston, two extensions to file a brief. By letter of March 8, 2022, we
admonished counsel that failure to file a brief by March 28 could result in the appeal being
abated and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings without further
notice. To date, Appellant’s counsel has not filed a brief.
Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court for further
proceedings. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(2), (3). Upon remand, the trial court shall
determine the following:
(1) whether Appellant desires to prosecute the appeal;
(2) whether Appellant is indigent;
(3) why a timely appellate brief has not been filed on Appellant’s behalf;
(4) whether Appellant’s counsel has abandoned the appeal;
(5) whether Appellant has been denied the effective assistance of counsel;
(6) whether new counsel should be appointed; and
(7) if Appellant desires to continue the appeal, the date the court may expect Appellant’s brief to be filed.
The trial court is directed to enter such orders necessary to address the
aforementioned questions. So too shall it include its findings on those matters in a
supplemental record and cause that record to be filed with this court by May 9, 2022. If
it is determined that Appellant desires to proceed with the appeal, is indigent, and has
been denied the effective assistance of counsel, the trial court may appoint him new
2 counsel; the name, address, email address, telephone number, and state bar number of
any newly appointed counsel shall be included in the aforementioned findings.
Should Johnston file a brief on or before April 29, 2022, he is directed to
immediately notify the trial court of the filing, in writing, whereupon the trial court shall not
be required to take any further action.
It is so ordered.
Per Curiam
Do not publish.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Luis Felipe Maturino-Rodriguez v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/luis-felipe-maturino-rodriguez-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2022.