Opinion
03-24-00052-CR
02-22-2024
Rafael Antonio Rosado, Appellant v. The State of Texas, Appellee
Do Not Publish
FROM THE 368TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY NO. 22-1397-K368, THE HONORABLE SARAH SOELDNER BRUCHMILLER, JUDGE PRESIDING
Before Baker, Triana, and Kelly, Justices.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Gisela D. Triana, Justice
Appellant Rafael Antonio Rosado has filed a "motion to abate and dismiss the appeal," which we construe as a motion to dismiss his appeal. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).
We construe this as a motion to dismiss because in the motion, counsel makes no argument for abatement. Instead, counsel argues that dismissal would be appropriate because "appellant has indicated that he no longer wishes to continue with the appeal." Moreover, although appellant has signed a statement attached to the motion requesting that his "appeal be abated," he states that he understands that his "existing sentence will stand, and that the appeal will not go forward." Those are the effects of a dismissal. Thus, we conclude that in substance, appellant is requesting dismissal of his appeal. See, e.g., Skinner v. State, 484 S.W.3d 434, 437-38 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016) (explaining that "when construing an order or motion," courts must "consider the substance of the filing and not just the label attached to it"); see also Lujan v. State, Nos. 01-22-00771-CR & 01-22-00772-CR, 2022 WL 17684052, at *1 (Tex. App.- Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 15, 2022, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (construing similar motion to "abate and dismiss" appeal as motion to dismiss).