Richard Earl Ortiz v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 16, 2013
• Docket: 14-12-00726-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

Motion Granted; Abatement Order filed January 16, 2013

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals ____________

NO. 14-12-00726-CR ____________

RICHARD EARL ORTIZ, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 262nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1319044

ABATEMENT ORDER

Appellant has filed a motion to abate for the trial court to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law on the admission of appellant’s statements. Article 38.22, section 6 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure requires the trial court to make written fact findings and conclusions of law as to whether a challenged statement was made voluntarily, even if appellant did not request them or object to their absence. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 38.22 ' 6 (Vernon 2005); Urias v. State, 155 S.W.3d 141, 142 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). The statute is mandatory and the proper procedure to correct the error is to abate the appeal and direct the trial court to make the required findings and conclusions. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.4; Wicker v. State, 740 S.W.2d 779, 784 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987). The motion is GRANTED.

Accordingly, the trial court is directed to reduce to writing its findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of appellant’s statements and have a supplemental clerk’s record containing those findings filed with the clerk of this Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this order.

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 findings and recommendations are filed in this Court. The Court will also consider an appropriate motion to reinstate the appeal filed by either party.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Jamison, and McCally.