Opinion
NO. 14-18-00152-CR
08-23-2018
DANIEL TRAVIS DURHAM, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 185th District Court Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 1433944
ABATEMENT ORDER
The trial court denied appellant's motion to suppress his statement but did submit findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of the 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). Appellant asks us to abate the appeal and direct the trial court to make the required findings and conclusions. The motion has been pending for more than 10 days, and no response has been filed.
The motion is GRANTED. The trial court is directed to reduce to writing its findings of fact and conclusions of law on the voluntariness of appellant's statement and have a supplemental clerk's record containing those findings filed with the clerk of this court by September 24 , 2018 .
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.
PER CURIAM