From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dunigan v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District, Waco
Apr 21, 2010
No. 10-10-00043-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 21, 2010)

Opinion

No. 10-10-00043-CR

Order issued and filed April 21, 2010. DO NOT PUBLISH.

Appealed from the 40th District Court Ellis County, Texas, Trial Court No. 32765CR. Appeal abated.

Before Chief Justice GRAY, Justice REYNA, and Justice DAVIS.


ABATEMENT ORDER


David Duane Dunigan was convicted of evading arrest with a vehicle and sentenced to 20 years in prison. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 38.04 (Vernon Supp. 2009). Trial counsel for Dunigan failed to timely file a notice of appeal, and the appeal was dismissed. Dunigan v. State, 293 S.W.3d 223 (Tex. App.-Waco 2009, no pet.). Pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus, the Court of Criminal Appeals allowed Dunigan an out-of-time appeal. Ex parte Dunigan, No. AP-76,271, 2010 Tex. Crim. App. Unpub. LEXIS 24 (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 13, 2010). Thereafter, Dunigan filed a timely notice of appeal, and the trial court appointed new counsel on appeal for Dunigan. Upon receiving a supplemental clerk's record, this Court discovered a letter in the clerk's record from Dunigan to his newly appointed attorney asking him to withdraw and informing him that Dunigan wished to represent himself in his appeal. Also in the supplemental clerk's record is a "Motion for Self Representation" filed with the trial court. Accordingly, this appeal is abated to the trial court to hold a hearing within 30 days from the date of this order to consider and determine in writing and on the record: 1) whether to remove counsel or allow counsel to withdraw; 2) whether to retain the current appointed counsel or appoint new counsel for Dunigan; 3) whether Dunigan wishes to waive his right to counsel; and 4) whether Dunigan may represent himself on appeal, if he so wishes. If Dunigan wishes to waive his right to counsel and represent himself on appeal, the waiver should be made knowingly and intelligently, and he should be warned of the dangers and disadvantages accompanying such waiver. Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 835, 95 S. Ct. 2525, 2541, 45 L. Ed. 2d 562 (1975); Hatten v. State, 71 S.W.3d 332, 333 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002). A waiver of the right to counsel must be in writing and must substantially comply with article 1.051(g) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 1.051(g) (Vernon Supp. 2009). Supplemental Clerk's and Reporter's Records containing the trial court's written and oral findings and rulings are ordered to be filed within 45 days from the date of this order.


Summaries of

Dunigan v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District, Waco
Apr 21, 2010
No. 10-10-00043-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 21, 2010)
Case details for

Dunigan v. State

Case Details

Full title:David Duane Dunigan, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Tenth District, Waco

Date published: Apr 21, 2010

Citations

No. 10-10-00043-CR (Tex. App. Apr. 21, 2010)