Opinion
NO. 14-15-00236-CR
04-07-2016
BRANDON JOSEPH WILLIAMS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 149th District Court Brazoria County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 71723
ABATEMENT ORDER
Appellant challenges the trial court's order denying his motion to suppress statements in the underlying murder conviction. Our review of the record reflects the trial court's findings are inadequate for our review of the trial court's application of the law to the facts in determining whether the defendant's statements "were freely and voluntarily made."
The trial court is required to make "essential findings," meaning "findings of fact and conclusions of law adequate to provide an appellate court with a basis upon which to review the trial court's application of the law to the facts." State v. Saenz, 411 S.W.3d 488, 495 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). Accordingly, we must abate and remand unless those findings and conclusions "were adequate and complete, covering every potentially dispositive issue that might reasonably be said to have arisen in the course of the suppression proceedings." Elias v. State, 339 S.W.3d 667, 676 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011).
Here, the trial court's findings are inadequate regarding whether appellant was intoxicated at the time he made his statement or whether his intoxication, if any, impacted his understanding of his Miranda and statutory rights such that he could make an independent, informed, and volitional decision to waive his rights and make a free and voluntary statement to the officers.
Accordingly, the trial court is directed to amend its findings of fact and conclusions of law on the denial of appellant's motion to suppress and have a supplemental clerk's record containing those findings filed with the clerk of this court within thirty 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 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 Panel consists of Justices Christopher, McCally, and Busby.