Singer, Thomas Benton v. State
Opinion
--------··--·---- ~-- ·-~- ~~-- --- - - ---------- ----~-~-·- -----------------------
REVERSE and REMAND; Opinion issued January 16, 2013.
In The QCourt of ~pea~ jfiftb J}i~tid of ~exa~ at J}alla~
No. 05-10-00892-CR
THOMAS BENTON SINGER, Appellant
v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. MB07-49876-F
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices O'Neill, FitzGerald, and Lang-Miers Opinion by Justice Justice O'Neill
Appellant Thomas Benton Singer appeals his conviction for driving while intoxicated
(DWI). In a single issue, appellant contends he is entitled to a new trial because part of the
record has been lost or destroyed. For the following reasons, we reverse appellant's conviction
and remand for a new trial.
Appellant filed a pretrial motion to suppress seeking suppression of all evidence obtained
as a result of his warrantless DWI stop. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied
appellant's motion to suppress. The trial court entered fmdings of fact and conclusions of law to
support its denial of the motion. Appellant subsequently pleaded guilty to the indictment 1 pursuant to a plea bargain agreement. The trial court certified appellant's right to appeal rulings
raised by written motion and ruled on before trial. ~ppellant appealed the trial court's ruling on
the motion to suppress and timely requested the reporter's record from the hearing on the motion
to suppress. However, no such record was ever filed.
In a single issue, appellant contends he is entitled to a new trial because the reporter's
record was lost or destroyed through no fault of his own. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure
34.6(f) provides that an appellant is entitled to a new trial (1) if the appellant has timely
requested a reporter's record; (2) if, without the appellant's fault, a significant exhibit or a
significant portion of the court reporter's notes and records has been lost or destroyed; (3) if the
lost or destroyed record is necessary to the appeal's resolution; and (4) if the lost or destroyed
record cannot be replaced by agreement of the parties. TEx. R. APP. P. 34.6(f).
When the court reporter failed to file the reporter's record, we abated this appeal to allow
the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine why no reporter's record had been filed. The
trial court held a hearing in accordance with our order. At the hearing, the court reporter testified
she received a request for the reporter's record and that, after a diligent search, she could not
locate the record. The trial court determined the notes from the hearing were not available and
cannot be transcribed. We reinstated the appeal, adopted the trial court's fmdings, and
concluded there would be no reporter's record in this appeal.
According to the State, no reporter's record is necessary for this Court to resolve the
appeal because the only issue appellant is permitted to appeal is the order on the motion to
suppress and the trial court's fmdings of fact and conclusions of law are alone sufficient to
enable this Court to review that order. The State then outlines the trial court's fmdings of fact
and asserts the fmdings support the trial court's ruling. The State's argument ignores the
2 requirement that the trial court's fmdings of fact be supported by the record. See Miller v. State,
_ S.W.3d _ , 2012 WL 5869416, * 6 (Tex. Crirn. App. 2012). In particular, an appellant is
permitted to challenge a suppression ruling by showing the trial court's fact fmdings are not
supported by the record. See id. Without a record of the hearing on the motion to suppress, it is
impossible for appellant to make such a challenge or for this Court to review the trial court's
ruling. Because we conclude a statement of facts is necessary to our resolution of this appeal, we
reverse the trial court's judgment and remand for a new trial.
Do Not Publish TEx. R. APP. P. 47
100892F. U05
3 Qiourt of Appeals lf.ifth, 1ilistrid of Thomas Benton Singer, Appellant On Appeal from the County Criminal Court No. 5, Dallas County, Texas No. 05-10-00892-CR V. Trial Court Cause No. MB0?-49876-F. Opinion delivered by Justice O'Neill. The State of Tex~, Appellee Justices FitzGerald and Lang-Miers participating. Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is REVERSED and the cause REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. ~ th Judgment entered this 16 day of January, 2013.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Singer, Thomas Benton v. State (Singer, Thomas Benton v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.