From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Maroney v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Oct 28, 2022
No. 05-22-00393-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 28, 2022)

Opinion

05-22-00393-CR

10-28-2022

ANTHONY DAVID MARONEY, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the 59th Judicial District Court Grayson County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 073585

ORDER

LANA MYERS, JUSTICE

Before the Court are appellant's October 13, 2022 motion to abate the appeal and appellate counsel's October 17, 2022 motion to withdraw as attorney of record. Appellant's pro se motion complains about the effectiveness of counsel's representation and requests an abatement to either allow appellant to review the record himself and file a pro se brief or else to appoint new counsel. Counsel's motion to withdraw states the motion was filed "so that Appellant may be represented by counsel of his choice."

We GRANT appellate counsel's motion to withdraw as attorney of record. We DIRECT the Clerk to remove Jeromie Oney as counsel for appellant.

We GRANT appellant's motion to abate. We ORDER the trial court to conduct a hearing and make findings of fact regarding (1) whether new counsel should be appointed to represent appellant; (2) whether appellant wishes to waive his right to counsel on appeal and proceed pro se: (3) if appellant does desire to proceed pro se, whether his waiver of the right to counsel on appeal is made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently; (4) whether any decision by appellant to waive counsel on appeal and proceed pro se is in the best interest of appellant and the State; and (5) whether appellant is fully aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation.

If the trial court determines that new counsel should be appointed, we ORDER the trial court to appoint new counsel to represent appellant in this appeal and to transmit a supplemental clerk's record containing the trial court's findings of facts and the order appointing new counsel to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order.

If the trial court determines that appellant should be allowed to represent himself pro se, we ORDER the trial court to make arrangements to furnish appellant with a paper copy of the clerk's and reporter's records in the above case (with the exception of any CDs or DVDs which are not allowed by regulations of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice) and to transmit a supplemental clerk's record containing the trial court's findings of facts to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date of this order.

We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send copies of this order to the Honorable Larry A. Phillips, Presiding Judge, 59th Judicial District Court; Jeromie Oney; Karla R. Baugh, assistant criminal district attorney; and appellant Anthony David Maroney, TDCJ No. 02405570, Lewis Unit, 777 FM 3497, Woodville, Texas 75990.

We ABATE this appeal to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal will be reinstated when the supplemental clerk's record is received or the Court deems it appropriate to do so.


Summaries of

Maroney v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas
Oct 28, 2022
No. 05-22-00393-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 28, 2022)
Case details for

Maroney v. State

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY DAVID MARONEY, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District, Dallas

Date published: Oct 28, 2022

Citations

No. 05-22-00393-CR (Tex. App. Oct. 28, 2022)