Wilkins, Louis Oneal v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided May 9, 2013·No. 05-12-00333-CR·Published

Opinion

Order entered May 9, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-12-00333-CR

LOUIS ONEAL WILKINS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 401-80751-2011

ORDER

Appellant is represented by counsel; therefore, appellant’s pro se motion presents nothing

for review and is hereby DENIED. Rudd v. State, 616 S.W.2d 623, 625 (Tex. Crim. App. 1981).

Moreover, any motion for a bond hearing must be directed to the trial court. See TEX. CRIM.

PROC. CODE ANN. art. 44.04 (West 2006).

/s/ DAVID LEWIS

JUSTICE

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

Wilkins, Louis Oneal v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2013).

Wilkins, Louis Oneal v. State (Wilkins, Louis Oneal v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rudd v. State
616 S.W.2d 623 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1981)