Randall Bolivar v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 11, 2015
Docket13-14-00157-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Randall Bolivar v. State (Randall Bolivar 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
Randall Bolivar v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

NUMBER 13-14-00157-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________

RANDALL BOLIVAR, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. ____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 107th District Court of Cameron County, Texas. ____________________________________________________________

ORDER ABATING APPEAL Before Justices Garza, Benavides, and Perkes Order Per Curiam

This cause is before the Court on appellant’s motion to dismiss counsel and

proceed pro se. Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a brief on December 10, 2014. Appellant states that counsel filed the brief without consent and has failed to

communicate.

The Court, having considered appellant's pro se motion and the appellant's

apparent desire to proceed on appeal without the benefit of counsel, is of the opinion that

the appeal should be abated in accordance with Hubbard v. State, 739 S.W.2d 341 (Tex.

Crim. App. 1987). The trial court is ordered to immediately conduct a hearing to

determine if appellant desires to proceed pro se. The trial court is required to make the

appellant aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation and to develop

evidence as to whether appellant's apparent decision to relinquish the obvious benefits

associated with having appointed appellate counsel and to proceed pro se is knowingly

and intelligently made.

The trial court is further ordered to make appropriate findings and

recommendations and forward a transcription of the hearing to this Court within fifteen

days from the date of this order. If the trial court finds that appellant knowingly and

intelligently waives his right to counsel in compliance with TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art.

1.051(g), then the trial court shall make a copy of the clerk’s record and reporter’s record

available to appellant so that he can file his brief. Appellant’s brief shall be filed thirty

days from the date he receives the record.

Appellant’s motion to dismiss counsel and to proceed pro se is CARRIED WITH

THE CASE pending receipt and review of the trial court’s findings and conclusions on

remand. Furthermore, appellant’s motion to abate and supplement the clerk’s record,

motion to abate and enter findings of fact and conclusions of law, and motion to abate for

2 an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s pro se motion for new trial are DENIED. The

appeal is ordered ABATED.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the 11th day of March, 2015.

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

Related

Hubbard v. State
739 S.W.2d 341 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Randall Bolivar v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/randall-bolivar-v-state-texapp-2015.