Narjes Modarresi v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 26, 2015
Docket14-14-00427-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Narjes Modarresi v. State (Narjes Modarresi 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
Narjes Modarresi v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Motion Granted; Order filed March 26, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-14-00427-CR ____________

NARJES MODARRESI, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 339th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1260243

ORDER

Appellant’s brief was originally due on November 24, 2014. Appellant did not file a brief or a motion for extension of time to file the brief. On December 18, 2014, this court abated this appeal and requested that the trial court conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file appellant’s brief. Before the hearing was held, appellant’s appointed counsel, Vivian R. King, filed a motion for extension of time to file appellant’s brief, which contained a reasonable explanation for the late brief. Accordingly, we ordered the appeal reinstated and granted appellant’s request for an extension of time to file appellant’s brief to January 30, 2015, with a notation that no further extensions of time would be granted absent exceptional circumstances.

Appellant filed a request for a further extension of time, which was granted to March 2, 2015. No brief was filed, but counsel has requested a further extension of time. Counsel has cited exceptional circumstances in the motion. Accordingly, we grant the extension request and ORDER appellant’s counsel to file appellant’s brief on or before April 3, 2015. If counsel does not timely file appellant’s brief as ordered, the court will issue an order abating the appeal and directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the brief and the consideration of sanctions, appointment of new counsel, or other appropriate relief.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and McCally.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Narjes Modarresi v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/narjes-modarresi-v-state-texapp-2015.