Nathan Earl Burgess v. State of Texas
This text of Nathan Earl Burgess v. State of Texas (Nathan Earl Burgess v. 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
Order entered July 22, 2014
In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-14-00216-CR
NATHAN EARL BURGESS, Appellant
V.
STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 001-86625-2012
ORDER The Court has received a supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s order granting Alan Kramer Taggart’s motion to withdraw and the order appointing William Schultz to represent appellant. Accordingly, we DIRECT the Clerk to substitute William Schultz as appellant’s appointed attorney of record in place of Alan Kramer Taggart. We ORDER Mr. Schultz to file appellant’s brief within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order. The Court DENIES appellant’s July 17, 2014 pro se motion to extend time to file his brief. See Rudd v. State, 616 S.W.2d 623 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1981). We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to William Schultz, Alan Taggart, and the Collin County District Attorney’s Office.
/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Nathan Earl Burgess v. State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nathan-earl-burgess-v-state-of-texas-texapp-2014.