Toronto E. Lockridge v. State
This text of Toronto E. Lockridge v. State (Toronto E. Lockridge 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.
Opinion
In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-12-00034-CR
TORONTO E. LOCKRIDGE, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 124th District Court Gregg County, Texas Trial Court No. 38675-B
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. O R D E R
Toronto E. Lockridge, appellant, was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in the
Texas Department of Criminal Justice Correctional Institutions Division. His notice of appeal
was timely filed March 1, 2012. The clerk’s record was filed April 4, 2012, and the reporter’s
record was filed July 13, 2012, making the appellant’s brief due August 13, 2012. Counsel is
appointed.
Appellant’s counsel has filed three motions to extend the briefing deadline in this matter,
and, for good cause shown, we granted all three of those motions. The last motion to extend was
filed October 26, 2012, and resulted in a new filing deadline of November 27, 2012. Having
received nothing from appellant’s counsel, the clerk’s office sent a late-brief notice January 10,
2013, giving counsel until January 22, 2013, to file appellant’s brief. Since that time, we have
received neither the appellant’s brief nor a request for further extension of the filing deadline.
Inquiries from our clerk’s office to appellant’s counsel regarding the overdue brief have proven
unproductive.
Because the brief has not been filed and because we have heard nothing further from
appellant’s counsel, we abate this case to the trial court pursuant to Rule 38.8(b) of the Texas
Rules of Appellate Procedure for a hearing to determine why counsel has not filed the brief,
whether the brief can be promptly filed with this Court, whether Lockridge desires to prosecute
his appeal, and whether he is indigent. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(2). The hearing is to be
conducted within fifteen days of the date of this order. The trial court may also address other
matters as it deems appropriate, including appointing different counsel for appellant if necessary.
2 The trial court’s findings and recommendations on the issues set forth above shall be
entered into the record of the case and presented to this Court in the form of a supplemental
clerk’s record within fifteen days of the date of the hearing. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(3). The
reporter’s record of the hearing shall also be filed with this Court in the form of a supplemental
reporter’s record within fifteen days of the date of the hearing. See id.
All appellate timetables are stayed and will resume on our receipt of (1) the appellant’s
brief or (2) the supplemental appellate record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT
Date: February 1, 2013
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Toronto E. Lockridge v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toronto-e-lockridge-v-state-texapp-2013.