Raymond Mitchell v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Raymond Mitchell v. State

DecidedSeptember 29, 2011

Docket14-10-01210-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Raymond Mitchell v. State (Raymond Mitchell 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

Raymond Mitchell v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion Granted; Abatement Order filed September 29, 2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-10-01210-CR ____________

RAYMOND MITCHELL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 351st District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1181757

ABATEMENT ORDER

Appellant was convicted of burglary of a habitation. On December 7, 2010, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for twenty-five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. On June 13, 2011, appellant’s appointed counsel, Brian Middleton, filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We disagree with appellate counsel’s conclusion that there are no arguable issues for appeal. Specifically, counsel’s brief does not address sufficiently the issue of appellant’s competency for trial.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw from his representation of appellant in this appeal, and we enter the following order:

We order the appeal ABATED and remand the case to the trial court with instructions to appoint new counsel to file a new brief on behalf of appellant. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex.Crim.App.2005). The trial court is directed to have a supplemental clerk’s record containing an order appointing new counsel filed with the clerk of this court on or before October 28, 2011.

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 the trial court’s supplemental clerk’s record is filed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Brown, Boyce, and McCally.

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

Motion Granted; Abatement Order filed September 29, 2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-10-01210-CR ____________

RAYMOND MITCHELL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 351st District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1181757

ABATEMENT ORDER

Appellant was convicted of burglary of a habitation. On December 7, 2010, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for twenty-five years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. On June 13, 2011, appellant’s appointed counsel, Brian Middleton, filed a brief in which he concludes that the appeal is wholly frivolous and without merit, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967). A copy of counsel’s brief was delivered to appellant. Appellant was advised of the right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). As of this date, no pro se response has been filed.

We disagree with appellate counsel’s conclusion that there are no arguable issues for appeal. Specifically, counsel’s brief does not address sufficiently the issue of appellant’s competency for trial.

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw from his representation of appellant in this appeal, and we enter the following order:

We order the appeal ABATED and remand the case to the trial court with instructions to appoint new counsel to file a new brief on behalf of appellant. See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex.Crim.App.2005). The trial court is directed to have a supplemental clerk’s record containing an order appointing new counsel filed with the clerk of this court on or before October 28, 2011.

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 the trial court’s supplemental clerk’s record is filed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Brown, Boyce, and McCally.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Raymond Mitchell v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raymond-mitchell-v-state-texapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack