Michael Toro v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 15, 2015
Docket01-15-00214-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Michael Toro v. State (Michael Toro 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
Michael Toro v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Michael Toro v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-15-00214-CR

Trial court case number: 1330494

Trial court: 182nd District Court, Harris County, Texas

Appellant is not represented by counsel. Appellant’s brief was due on May 22, 2015. On June 10, 2015, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that a brief had not yet been filed and required a response within 10 days. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(2). No response was received and no brief has been filed. Pursuant to Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8, we must abate this appeal and remand the case to the trial court for a hearing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(2)–(3). We direct the trial court to conduct a hearing at which a representative of the Harris County District Attorney’s Office and appellant shall be present.1 The trial court shall have a court reporter record the hearing. The trial court is directed to make appropriate findings on these issues: (1) whether appellant wishes to prosecute the appeal; and, if so, (2) whether appellant is presently (a) indigent, in which case the trial court should appoint new appellate counsel at no expense to appellant and establish a date by which counsel will file a brief, no later than 30 days from the appointment; or (b) not indigent, in which case the trial court should establish a date by which appellant shall retain new counsel; TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. arts. 1.051(d), 26.04; TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(2), (3), (4).

1 If appellant is incarcerated, at the trial court’s discretion, appellant may participate in the hearing by closed-circuit video teleconferencing. Any such teleconference must use a closed-circuit video teleconferencing system that provides for a simultaneous compressed full motion video and interactive communication of image and sound between the trial court, appellant, and any attorneys representing the State or appellant. On request of appellant, appellant and his counsel shall be able to communicate privately without being recorded or heard by the trial court or the attorney representing the State. The trial court shall cause a supplemental clerk’s record containing its findings and recommendations, including the name, address, telephone number, and State Bar number of any appointed counsel, and the reporter’s record of the hearing to be filed in this Court no later than November 12, 2015. If the hearing is conducted by video teleconference, a certified video recording of the hearing shall be filed in this Court no later than November 12, 2015.

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 a supplemental clerk’s record that complies with this order, and the reporter’s record of the hearing, have been filed in this Court. The trial court coordinator shall set a hearing date and notify the parties and the Clerk of this Court of such date.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: October 15, 2015

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Michael Toro v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-toro-v-state-texapp-2015.