Swift, Christopher Jay

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 20, 2006
DocketAP-75,186
StatusPublished

This text of Swift, Christopher Jay (Swift, Christopher Jay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Swift, Christopher Jay, (Tex. 2006).

Opinion



IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS



NO. AP-75,186
CHRISTOPHER JAY SWIFT, Appellant


v.



THE STATE OF TEXAS



ON DIRECT APPEAL FROM CAUSE NO. F-2003-1720-C

IN THE 211
TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

DENTON COUNTY

Holcomb, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

O P I N I O N



In April 2005, a jury convicted appellant of capital murder. Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 19.03(a). Based on the jury's answers to the special issues set forth in Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 37.071, sections 2(b) and 2(e), the trial judge sentenced appellant to death. Art. 37.071, § 2(g). (1) Direct appeal to this Court is automatic. Art. 37.071, § 2(h). We affirm.

Appellant was represented by counsel at trial. The court originally appointed an attorney to represent him on direct appeal. However, appellant insisted that he did not want counsel. In a hearing on the matter, the trial court determined that appellant had been evaluated by an expert who concluded that he was competent to make the decision to represent himself. The court thereafter fully admonished appellant of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, found that appellant made his decision voluntarily and intelligently, and dismissed appellate counsel. See Martinez v. State, 163 S.W.3d 88, 90 n.1 (Tex. App.- Amarillo 2004)(citing Webb v. State, 533 S.W.2d 780 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976)).

Appellant did not file a brief on his behalf in this appeal. (2) We therefore submitted the case without the benefit of briefs and, in the interest of justice, reviewed the entire record. Having found no unassigned fundamental error, we affirm the judgment and sentence of the trial court.



DELIVERED: SEPTEMBER 20, 2006

DO NOT PUBLISH

1. Unless otherwise indicated all references to Articles refer to the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. Before he was released from his duties to appellant, appointed counsel prepared and sent a brief to this Court on appellant's behalf. Counsel's brief was received by the Court, but is not considered filed in the case.

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

Related

Martinez v. State
163 S.W.3d 88 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)
Webb v. State
533 S.W.2d 780 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Swift, Christopher Jay, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swift-christopher-jay-texcrimapp-2006.