Scott Michael Young v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Scott Michael Young v. State

DecidedSeptember 23, 2020

Docket12-19-00349-CR

StatusPublished

This text of Scott Michael Young v. State (Scott Michael Young 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

Scott Michael Young v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

CAUSE NO. 12-19-00349-CR, 12-19-00374-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

SCOTT MICHAEL YOUNG, } APPEALED FROM 241ST DISTRICT APPELLANT

V. } COURT IN AND FOR

THE STATE OF TEXAS, } SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS APPELLEE ORDER

Came on for consideration the Appellant’s Pro Se Request for Copies of the Court Records in the above-referenced causes, and it appearing that Appellant’s counsel has filed an Anders brief herein and that Appellant has been unable to adequately examine the record so that he can file a pro se brief, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion be, and hereby is GRANTED and that the trial court ensure that Appellant has the opportunity to fully and adequately examine the appellate record on or before Friday, October 23, 2020, by paper form sent to the warden of Appellant’s unit with explicit instructions to provide Appellant with supervised access to printed record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 318, 320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (appellate courts have an “on-going responsibility, once an appellant manifests his desire for pro se record access, to officially guide the process and follow through to make sure that such access is granted before they rule on the validity of appointed counsel’s Anders brief and motion to withdraw;” an “appellate court may not rule on the motion to withdraw and the validity of the Anders brief until the appellant has been given access to, and an adequate opportunity to review, the appellate record”). The court shall provide Appellant with a receipt letter to sign and return. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the trial court notify this Court in writing as to the date or dates upon which the appellate record was made available to Appellant and the amount of time for which Appellant had access to the record on each date, and provide this court with a copy of the receipt letter signed by the Appellant. Appellant shall have thirty (30) days from the day the appellate record was first made available to him to file his pro se brief with this Court. WITNESS THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice, Court of Appeals District, Tyler, Texas. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE at Tyler, Texas, this 23rd day of September 2020, A.D.

_________________________________ KATRINA MCCLENNY, CLERK

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

CAUSE NO. 12-19-00349-CR, 12-19-00374-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT TYLER, TEXAS

SCOTT MICHAEL YOUNG, } APPEALED FROM 241ST DISTRICT APPELLANT

V. } COURT IN AND FOR

THE STATE OF TEXAS, } SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS APPELLEE ORDER

Came on for consideration the Appellant’s Pro Se Request for Copies of the Court Records in the above-referenced causes, and it appearing that Appellant’s counsel has filed an Anders brief herein and that Appellant has been unable to adequately examine the record so that he can file a pro se brief, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion be, and hereby is GRANTED and that the trial court ensure that Appellant has the opportunity to fully and adequately examine the appellate record on or before Friday, October 23, 2020, by paper form sent to the warden of Appellant’s unit with explicit instructions to provide Appellant with supervised access to printed record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 318, 320 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (appellate courts have an “on-going responsibility, once an appellant manifests his desire for pro se record access, to officially guide the process and follow through to make sure that such access is granted before they rule on the validity of appointed counsel’s Anders brief and motion to withdraw;” an “appellate court may not rule on the motion to withdraw and the validity of the Anders brief until the appellant has been given access to, and an adequate opportunity to review, the appellate record”). The court shall provide Appellant with a receipt letter to sign and return. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the trial court notify this Court in writing as to the date or dates upon which the appellate record was made available to Appellant and the amount of time for which Appellant had access to the record on each date, and provide this court with a copy of the receipt letter signed by the Appellant. Appellant shall have thirty (30) days from the day the appellate record was first made available to him to file his pro se brief with this Court. WITNESS THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice, Court of Appeals District, Tyler, Texas. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE at Tyler, Texas, this 23rd day of September 2020, A.D.

_________________________________ KATRINA MCCLENNY, CLERK

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Scott Michael Young v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-michael-young-v-state-texapp-2020.

Opinion

V. } COURT IN AND FOR

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack