Opinion
NO. 14-14-00595-CR
06-16-2016
JOHNTAY GIBSON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 230th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1378280
ABATEMENT ORDER
The trial court failed to submit findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of appellant's statement. Article 38.22, section 6 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure requires the trial court to make written fact findings and conclusions of law as to whether a challenged statement was made voluntarily, even if appellant did not request them or object to their absence. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.22 § 6; Urias v. State, 155 S.W.3d 141, 142 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). The statute is mandatory and the proper procedure to correct the error is to abate the appeal and direct the trial court to make the required findings and conclusions. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.4; Wicker v. State, 740 S.W.2d 779, 784 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987).
On appeal, appellant claims the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the second part of his videotaped interview because officers failed to re-warn him in accordance with Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966), and article 38.22 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, the trial court is directed to reduce to writing its findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of the second part of appellant's videotaped interview. The trial court is further directed to have a supplemental clerk's record containing those findings filed with the clerk of this Court on or before July 15, 2016.
The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this Court's active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this Court's active docket when the trial court's findings and recommendations are filed in this Court. The Court will also consider an appropriate motion to reinstate the appeal filed by either party.
It is so ORDERED.
PER CURIAM