Opinion
No. 10-09-00009-CR, 10-09-00295-CR, 10-10-00047-CR.
Order issued and filed June 2, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH.
Before Chief Justice GRAY, Justice REYNA, and Justice DAVIS.
Appealed from the 13th District Court Navarro County, Texas, Trial Court Nos. 31327-CR, 32165-CR 32548-CR.
ABATEMENT ORDER
The reporter's record is overdue in each of these appeals. In the past, this Court has issued an order directly to a court reporter requiring that the record be filed within a specified time or the Court may issue a show cause order and/or a judgment of contempt. See, e.g., McElwee v. Joham, 971 S.W.2d 198, 198 (Tex. App.-Waco 1998, order) (per curiam), disp. on merits, 15 S.W.3d 557 (Tex. App.-Waco 2000, no pet.). However, the court reporter (who is no longer the official court reporter) has effectively ceased communicating with the Court regarding these overdue records, she has not met the deadlines proposed by herself in extensions which have been granted, and she declined to claim a notice sent by the Clerk of this Court by certified mail, return receipt requested. Therefore, we will abate these appeals for a hearing in the trial court to ensure that the reporter's records are filed within a reasonable period of time following the date of this Order.
Cooks
Because Cooks filed a motion for new trial, the record was originally due in his appeal on April 13, 2009. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.2(b). The district clerk filed the clerk's record on March 16, 2009. The court reporter, Nancy Currie, filed an extension request on April 28, 2009 citing a "computer crash" and a lost disk as the reason for the request. The Court granted Currie's request, extending the deadline for the record to June 30. Currie filed a second extension request on July 14, explaining that she was having to "rewrite" the record and had employed a scopist to assist her. The Court granted this request, extending the deadline to August 31. After this deadline passed, the Clerk had several telephone conversations with Currie in which Currie assured the Clerk that she was working on the record and it would soon be filed. After Currie failed to follow through on these assurances, the Clerk sent a late-record notice in November. The Clerk has also placed several telephone calls to Currie regarding the late record, but since November Currie has failed to return the Clerk's telephone calls. On March 26, 2010, the Clerk sent Currie a letter advising that she had 14 days to file the reporter's record or a show-cause order may issue. In light of this notice, Currie's March 29 extension request was denied. The record was not filed. Currie filed another extension request on April 29, requesting an extension until May 21 because of a software malfunction and other equipment issues. That request was granted, but Currie has failed to file the record.Vasquez
Because Vasquez did not file a motion for new trial, the record was originally due in his appeal on November 16, 2009. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.2(a). The district clerk filed the clerk's record on November 2. After this deadline passed, the Clerk had several telephone conversations with Currie regarding the records in Cooks and in Vasquez. Currie assured the Clerk that she was working on these records and would file them soon. After Currie failed to follow through on these assurances, the Clerk sent a late-record notice on February 24. The Clerk has also placed several telephone calls to Currie regarding the late records, but since November Currie has failed to return the Clerk's telephone calls. Simultaneously with her extension request in Cooks (and in Reamy discussed below), Currie requested extensions on March 29 and April 29 for filing the record in Vasquez. Those extension requests have not been ruled on because of the Clerk's focus on ensuring the filing of the record in Cooks on the earliest possible date.Reamy
Because Reamy did not file a motion for new trial, the record was originally due in her appeal on March 15, 2010. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.2(a). The district clerk filed the clerk's record on March 12. As in the other two appeals, Currie filed extension requests in Reamy on March 29 and April 29. Those extension requests have not been ruled on because of the Clerk's focus on ensuring the filing of the record in Cooks on the earliest possible date. Although the record is not significantly past due in Reamy, we will abate Reamy with the other two appeals to ensure that the reporter's records in all three are filed reasonably soon after issuance of this Order.Abatement
Therefore, we abate this appeal to the trial court for a hearing to determine:(1) why Currie has failed to file the reporter's records for these appeals;
(2) Currie's current contact information, so the Clerk of this Court will have an address and a telephone number by which she can communicate with Currie;
(3) a date certain within a reasonable period of time when the reporter's record will be filed in each appeal; and
(4) whether any sanctions should be imposed on Currie.The trial court shall: (1) conduct the hearing within twenty-one (21) days after the date of this Order; (2) prepare any necessary findings of fact and conclusions of law; and (3) sign a written order consistent with the requirements of this Order. The district clerk shall file a supplemental clerk's record containing a copy of (1) the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law and (2) the trial court's order with the Clerk of this Court within thirty-five (35) days after the date of this Order. Unless the parties waive the making of a reporter's record in the abatement hearing, the trial court's current official court reporter is ordered to prepare and file a supplemental reporter's record of the abatement hearing with the Clerk of this Court within thirty-five (35) days after the date of this Order.