Opinion
01-24-00554-CR
12-12-2024
Christopher Holland v. The State of Texas
412th District Court of Brazoria County, No. 96101-CR
ORDER
Terry Adams, Judge
The complete record has been filed in the above-referenced appeal. Appellant's brief was due October 17, 2024. On November 7, 2024, we notified appellant that this case would be abated for a hearing pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(b) if a motion for extension along with appellant's brief or a motion to extend time to file appellant's brief was not filed within 10 days. Appellant's counsel, Tonya Rolland, has not filed a brief or a motion for extension.
Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(b)(1) provides that in a criminal case, an appellant's failure to file a brief does not authorize dismissal of the appeal or consideration of the appeal without briefs. TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(1). However, the Court may consider the appeal without briefs if the trial court has found that the appellant (1) no longer desires to prosecute the appeal or (2) is not indigent but has not made the necessary arrangements for filing a brief. TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(1), (4).
We therefore abate the appeal and remand for the trial court to immediately conduct a hearing at which a representative of the Brazoria County District Attorney's Office and appellant's counsel, Tonya Rolland, shall be present. TEX. R. APP. 38.8(b)(2). Appellant shall also be present for the hearing in person or, if appellant is incarcerated, at the trial court's discretion, appellant may participate in the hearing by closed-circuit video teleconferencing. The trial court shall have a court reporter record the hearing. The trial court is directed to:
Any such teleconference must use a closed-circuit video teleconferencing system that provides for a simultaneous compressed full motion video and interactive communication of image and sound between the trial court, appellant, and any attorneys representing the State or appellant. On request of appellant, appellant and his counsel shall be able to communicate privately without being recorded or heard by the trial court or the attorney representing the State.
(1) make a finding on whether appellant wishes to prosecute the appeal;
(2) if appellant does wish to prosecute the appeal, determine whether counsel Tonya Rolland has abandoned the appeal;
(3) if counsel Tonya Rolland has not abandoned the appeal: a. inquire of counsel the reasons, if any, that she has failed to file a brief on appellant's behalf; and b. set a date certain when appellant's brief is due, regardless of whether this Court has yet reinstated the appeal and no later than 30 days from the date of the hearing;
(4) if Tonya Rolland has abandoned this appeal, enter a written order relieving Tonya Rolland of her duties as appellant's counsel, including in the order the basis for the finding of abandonment, determine whether appellant is indigent, and:
a. if appellant is now indigent, appoint substitute appellate counsel at no expense to appellant;
b. if appellant is not indigent, admonish appellant of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, and:
i. determine whether appellant is knowingly and intelligently waiving his right to counsel and, if so, obtain a written waiver of the right to counsel and set a date certain when appellant's brief is due, regardless of whether this Court has yet reinstated the appeal and no later than 30 days from the date of the hearing; or,
ii. if appellant does not wish to proceed pro se, provide a deadline by which appellant must hire an attorney;
(5) make any other findings and recommendations the trial court deems appropriate; and
(6) enter written findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations as to these issues, separate and apart from any docket sheet notations.See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 1.051(a), (d)(1), (f); TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b); Gonzalez v. State, 117 S.W.3d 831, 837 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (stating that presumption in favor of right to choice of counsel may be overridden by other factors relating to fair and orderly administration of justice); Webb v. State, 533 S.W.2d 780, 784, 785 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976) (stating that criminal defendant may not manipulate right to choose counsel so as to interfere with fair administration of justice; "The trial court should therefore admonish an accused who desires to represent himself regarding the wisdom and practical consequences of that choice."); Carter v. State, No. 01-95-00977-CR, 1997 WL 184385, at *1 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] April 17, 1997, pet. ref'd) (not designated for publication) ("Thus, the public interest in the fair and orderly administration of justice may be greater than an accused's right to have counsel of his own choice."); cf. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 1.051(g) (requiring trial court to advise defendant of dangers and disadvantages of self-representation prior to proceeding to trial), 26.04(j)(2) (authorizing trial court to order appointed counsel to withdraw after finding of good cause is entered on record).
The trial court clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerk's record containing the trial court's findings and recommendations with this Court within 40 days of the date of this order. The court reporter is directed to file the reporter's record of the hearing within 40 days of the date of this order. If the hearing is conducted by video teleconference, a certified video recording of the hearing shall also be filed in this Court within 40 days of the date of this order.
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 supplemental clerk's record and the reporter's record are filed in this Court. The court coordinator of the trial court shall set a hearing date and notify the parties and the Clerk of this Court of such date.
It is so ORDERED.