Ray Salazar v. the State of Texas

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 14, 2023
Docket07-23-00036-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Ray Salazar v. the State of Texas (Ray Salazar 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
Ray Salazar v. the State of Texas, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-23-00036-CR

RAY SALAZAR, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

On Appeal from the 299th District Court Travis County, Texas Trial Court No. D-1-DC-16-900145, Honorable Karen Sage, Presiding

February 14, 2023 ORDER OF ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and YARBROUGH, JJ.

Appellant, Ray Salazar, appeals from the trial court’s order denying his motion for

post-conviction DNA testing. The clerk’s record has been filed. The reporter’s record

was due January 16, 2023, but was not filed because Appellant did not request

preparation nor make payment arrangements for the record. By letter of January 18,

2023, the Third Court of Appeals notified Appellant that the reporter’s record was overdue

and directed him to make any necessary payment arrangements for the reporter’s record

by January 30. The appeal was later transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001.

The reporter has since notified this Court that Appellant has not requested nor paid for

the reporter’s record to date.1

Accordingly, we abate the appeal and remand the cause to the trial court. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(a)(2). Upon remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means it

finds necessary to determine the following:

(1) whether Appellant still desires to prosecute the appeal;

(2) whether Appellant is indigent and entitled to have the reporter’s record

furnished without charge; and

(3) if appellant is not entitled to have the reporter’s record furnished without

charge, the date Appellant will make acceptable payment arrangements for

the reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 20.2.

The trial court is also directed to enter such orders necessary to address the

aforementioned questions. So too shall it include its findings on those matters in a

supplemental clerk’s record and cause that record to be filed with this Court by March 16,

2023.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.

1 We note that Appellant filed a “Declaration of Inability to Pay Cost” with the trial court on March 16, 2022. 2

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ray Salazar v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ray-salazar-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.