Martinez v. State
| Decision Date | 20 December 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 46362,46362 |
| Citation | 488 S.W.2d 77 |
| Parties | Lorenzo Ovalie MARTINEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Dell Barber, Colorado City, for appellant.
Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Robert A. Huttash, Asst. State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
DALLY, Commissioner.
This is an appeal from an order revoking probation.
The appellant entered a plea of guilty before the court on September 15, 1971, and was adjudged guilty of the felony offense of driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while intoxicated. The punishment was assessed at two years imprisonment. Imposition of the sentence was suspended and the appellant was placed on probation.
The appellant has failed a motion to abate this appeal, urging that the record has not been properly prepared, as provided by Article 40.09.
Notice of the completion of the record was mailed to the appellant's counsel on November 9, 1972, and the record was filed in this court on November 10, 1972. Article 40.09, § 7, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., provides that after completion of the record counsel shall have fifteen days to file objections to the record. The appellant was not provided this opportunity to object to the record, if he had any objections.
The record has not been approved by the trial court as provided by Article 40.09, § 7, V.A.C.C.P. The record has not been filed in the trial court as provided by Article 40.09, § 8, V.A.C.C.P.
Article 40.09, § 9, V.A.C.C.P., provides that the defendant shall have thirty days after approval of the record by the court or such additional period of time as the court may in its discretion authorize to file with the clerk of the trial court his appellate brief.
Article 40.09, § 10, V.A.C.C.P., provides that the State shall have thirty days after the defendant files his brief with the clerk of the trial court or such additional period of time as the trial court may in its discretion authorize, to file its brief with the trial court.
This appeal will be abated in order that the entire record may be properly approved and such further proceedings as may be had in the trial court under the provisions of Article 40.09, V.A.C.C.P., as though the same had not been transmitted to this court and filed. See, e.g., McKinney v. State, 477 S.W.2d 295 (Tex.Cr.App.1972) and Edwards v. State, 428 S.W.2d 343 (Tex.Cr.App.1968).
It is so ordered.
Opinion Approved by the Court.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Duncan v. Evans
...McKinney v. State, 477 S.W.2d 295 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Jordan v. State, 479 S.W.2d 667 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Martinez v. State, 488 S.W.2d 77 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Lessing v. State, 509 S.W.2d 356 Absent such procedure, the Courts of Appeals have available the power of contempt pursuant to Article ......
-
McFail v. State, 54708
...the situation where appellant's counsel was not provided sufficient time in which to file objections to the record. See Martinez v. State, 488 S.W.2d 77 (Tex.Cr.App.1972). As previously outlined, notice of completion was properly mailed on January 27, 1976, and the record was approved after......
-
Martinez v. State, 46362
...OPINION MORRISON, Judge. This is an appeal from a revocation of probation proceeding. Appellant's appeal was abated in Martinez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 488 S.W.2d 77. The record is now properly before us. The appeal will be considered on its Appellant plead guilty to the felony offense of dr......
- Brown v. State, 46283