Martin Rangel v. State
This text of Martin Rangel v. State (Martin Rangel 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
NUMBER 13-14-00637-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________
MARTIN RANGEL, Appellant,
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________
On appeal from the 117th District Court of Nueces County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________
ORDER OF ABATEMENT Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Garza Order Per Curiam The court reporter filed a partial record in this case on February 19, 2015. The
reporter notified this Court that a partial record was filed because the exhibits cannot be
located. This sequence of events requires us to effectuate our responsibility to avoid
further delay and to preserve the parties' rights. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(a)(2). Accordingly, this appeal is ABATED and the cause REMANDED to the trial court.
In accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 34.6(f)(4), the trial court is directed
to conduct a hearing to determine: (1) if the appellant has 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 and 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 destroyed 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. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.6(f).
The trial court is directed to forward the record of the proceedings, including any
orders and findings, to this Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this order, or to
notify this Court within such period indicating a date by which the trial court can comply.
It is so ordered.
PER CURIAM
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed the 3rd day of March, 2015.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Martin Rangel v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-rangel-v-state-texapp-2015.