Richard Owens v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 5, 2009
Docket14-09-00262-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Richard Owens v. State (Richard Owens 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
Richard Owens v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 5, 2009.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-09-00262-CR

RICHARD OWENS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 412th District Court

Brazoria County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 57,401


M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

            After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of two counts of theft. On February 20, 2009, the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for eighteen months in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and assessed a $5,000 fine. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

                        Appellant’s brief was due August 3, 2009, but it was not filed. A notice that the brief was past due was mailed to appellant August 13, 2009. No response was filed.

            On September 3 2009, this court abated the appeal and ordered a hearing to determine why appellant had not filed a brief in this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(2). On October 13, 2009, the trial court conducted the hearing. The record of the hearing was filed in this court on October 21, 2009. At the hearing appellant testified that he no longer wished to go forward with his appeal. The trial court found appellant no longer desires to prosecute his appeal, and filed appropriate findings of fact in a supplemental clerk’s record. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(2).

On the basis of those findings, this court has considered the appeal without briefs. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4). We have reviewed the record and find no fundamental error.

            Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

                                                                        PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Seymore and Sullivan.

Do not publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Richard Owens v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richard-owens-v-state-texapp-2009.