Michael Christopher Hurst v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 2, 2022
Docket09-22-00146-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Michael Christopher Hurst v. the State of Texas (Michael Christopher Hurst 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.

Bluebook
Michael Christopher Hurst v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-22-00145-CR NO. 09-22-00146-CR __________________

MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER HURST, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee __________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 435th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause Nos. 21-07-09227-CR and 21-07-09226-CR __________________________________________________________________

ORDER

The trial court appointed William Harrison to represent appellant Michael

Christopher Hurst on appeal. The reporter’s records were filed on June 27, 2022, and

the clerk’s records were filed on July 5, 2022. On November 7, 2022, the Court

granted a fourth extension of time to file the brief, noting that the extension was a

“final extension,” and we warned appellant’s court-appointed attorney, William

Harrison, that unless we received the brief by November 21, 2022, we would order

the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why no brief has been filed.

1 Although the brief of the appellant was due to be filed by November 21, 2022, the

brief has not been filed.

We abate the appeals and remand the cases to the trial court to conduct a

hearing at which a representative of the State, counsel for the appellant, and the

appellant shall be present. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(3). We direct the trial court

to determine whether or not appellant desires to pursue his appeal. If appellant

desires to pursue his appeal, we direct the trial court to determine why the brief of

the appellant has not been filed and whether good cause exists for appointed counsel,

William Harrison, to be relieved of his duties as appellate counsel and replaced by

substitute counsel. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 26.04(j)(2). If the trial court

determines that good cause exists to relieve appointed counsel of his duties, we direct

the trial court to appoint substitute counsel.

The record of the hearing, including any orders and findings of the trial court

judge, shall be sent to the appellate court for filing. The transcription of the court

reporter’s notes from the hearing and the recommendations of the trial court judge

are to be filed on or before January 3, 2023.

ORDER ENTERED December 2, 2022.

PER CURIAM

Before Kreger, Horton and Johnson, JJ.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Michael Christopher Hurst v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-christopher-hurst-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2022.