State v. Daniel Cabral-Tapia

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedOctober 11, 2018
Docket07-18-00252-CR
StatusPublished

This text of State v. Daniel Cabral-Tapia (State v. Daniel Cabral-Tapia) 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
State v. Daniel Cabral-Tapia, (Tex. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07-18-00252-CR

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLANT

V.

DANIEL CABRAL-TAPIA, APPELLEE

On Appeal from the County Court Hale County, Texas Trial Court No. 2017C-200, Honorable Bill Coleman, Presiding

October 11, 2018

ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PARKER, JJ.

Pending before this court is the State’s motion to abate the appeal and remand the

cause to the trial court to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law. The record

reflects that the trial court granted appellee Daniel Cabral-Tapia’s motion to suppress the

horizontal gaze nystagmus test and that the State timely filed a request for findings of fact

and conclusions of law. However, none were filed. In State v. Cullen, 195 S.W.3d 696,

699 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006), the Court of Criminal Appeals held that, “[u]pon the request

of the losing party on a motion to suppress evidence, the trial court shall state its essential findings.” There, the Court explained that the trial court’s refusal to state its findings and

conclusions prevented the court of appeals from a meaningful review of the decision to

grant or deny the motion to suppress. Id. at 698.

Accordingly, we abate the appeal and remand the cause to the trial court. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 44.4. Upon remand, the trial court shall execute findings of fact and

conclusions of law as required by State v. Cullen, supra. So too shall it include its findings

and conclusions in a supplemental clerk’s record and cause that record to be filed with

this court. Because we must “give precedence in [our] docket to an appeal filed” by the

State from an order granting a motion to suppress evidence, Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann.

art. 44.01(a)(5), (f) (West 2018), we set October 24, 2018, as the deadline by which the

findings and conclusions must be filed with this court. Should further time be needed to

perform these tasks, then same must be requested before October 24, 2018.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.

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

Related

State v. Cullen
195 S.W.3d 696 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State v. Daniel Cabral-Tapia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-daniel-cabral-tapia-texapp-2018.