Michael Paul Bridwell v. State

Summary

The Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas abated the appeal because the reporter’s record was overdue and the appellant’s intent to pursue the appeal was unclear. The trial court was ordered to determine whether the appellant wished to prosecute the appeal, his indigence and representation status, and the reasons for and expected filing date of the reporter’s record.

Holdings

1. Because the appellate record was overdue and the court lacked necessary information concerning appellant's desire to prosecute the appeal, indigence, entitlement to a reporter's record without payment, and effective representation, the appeal was properly abated and the trial court was ordered to make findings and transmit a supplemental record.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the appeal should be abated for trial-court findings concerning appellant's desire to prosecute the appeal, indigence, entitlement to a reporter's record without payment, and representation by counsel.
2. What findings were necessary to determine the identities and expected filing date of the court reporter or reporters responsible for the overdue reporter's record.

Disposition

other