Opinion
No. 08-19-00097-CR
11-27-2019
LEONARDO RAMIREZ, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, State.
Appeal from the 41 District Court of El Paso County, Texas (TC# 20170D04632) ORDER
Appellant has filed a fourth motion to file his brief. The Court will not act on the motion unless it is amended to adequately explains in detail the need for the extraordinary relief that he seeks.
Appellant was found guilty of Driving While Intoxicated, Third Offense, on January 29, 2019. He is currently incarcerated. He filed a notice of appeal on April 12, 2019. By August 2, 2019 both the Clerk's Record and the Reporter's Records were filed with this Court. His brief was accordingly due on September 1, 2019. Appellant filed three extensions of time and has been granted three thirty-day extension of time, making his brief due on November 30, 2019. With the last extension, the Court stated that no further extensions would be considered by the Court.
Any motion to extend the time to file a brief must state "the facts relied on to reasonably explain the need for an extension[.]" TEX.R.APP.P. 10.5(b)(1)(C). The first three of Appellant's motions contained the identical reason justifying the extension:
Counsel, as a sole practitioner, has had an extraordinary heavy jury trial and appellate briefing schedule, jury trial scheduled during this briefing timeline, all requiring extensive research and preparation time.
Attorney for appellant is currently involved in several complex criminal matters that require extensive research, preparation of witnesses, and evidence for
deposition and trial, set before the district courts of Texas, along with counsel's responsibilities on other urgent client matters.Those stated reasons refer to a "heavy jury trial and appellate briefing schedule" without any specific mention of the cases referred to. The same reasons reference work on "several complex criminal matters" without any specific mention of the matters at issue. And in the face of this Court's order that no further extensions would be considered, Appellant's fourth motion contains the exact same language. The cited reasons do not state the facts relied on to justify the extraordinary relief sought. Stated otherwise, use of boilerplate and non-specific reasons for an extension are inadequate to justify a fourth extension of time to file a brief.
Appellant may amend his motion to provide a specific factual basis for the extraordinary relief sought to this Court on or before December 6, 2019.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 27 day of November, 2019.
PER CURIAM Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.