Miguel Guerrero Reyes v. State ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • Order entered March 12, 2018
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
    No. 05-17-00757-CR
    MIGUEL GUERRERO REYES, Appellant
    V.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
    On Appeal from the 292nd Judicial District Court
    Dallas County, Texas
    Trial Court Cause No. F16-53482-V
    ORDER
    Appellant was convicted of indecency with a child. On March 5, 2018, appellate counsel
    filed an Anders brief along with a motion to withdraw as appellate counsel.
    An attorney who files an Anders brief must write a letter to the client to notify the client
    of the motion to withdraw and the accompanying Anders brief, providing him with a copy of
    each. See Kelly v. State, 
    436 S.W.3d 313
    , 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). The letter must inform
    the appellant of (1) his right to file a pro se response and of his right to review the record
    preparatory to filing that response and (2) his pro se right to seek discretionary review should the
    court of appeals declare his appeal frivolous. 
    Id. Finally, unless
    the attorney provides his client
    with a copy of the clerk’s record and reporter’s record, the letter must notify the client that
    should he wish to exercise his right to review the appellate record to file a response to the Anders
    brief, he should immediately file a motion for pro se access to the appellate record with the court
    of appeals; the attorney should provide the appellant with a form motion for this purpose, lacking
    only the appellant’s signature and the date, and inform the appellant that in order to effectuate his
    right to review the record, he must sign and date the motion and send it to the court of appeals.
    See 
    id. at 319–20.
    It is not clear from appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw or the Anders brief
    that counsel sent a copy of either document or provided any of the information mandated in Kelly
    v. State to appellant.    In fact, although properly captioned, the motion names a different
    individual as the appellant in the first sentence. In light of this, we STRIKE the March 5, 2018
    motion to withdraw as wholly inadequate.
    Furthermore, in the Anders brief, the victim and other child witnesses are referred to by
    name. Accordingly, we STRIKE appellant’s brief filed March 5, 2018.
    We ORDER appellant to file, within TEN DAYS of the date of this order, an amended
    brief that identifies the victim and any child witness either generically (e.g., “complainant”) or
    by initials only.
    We also ORDER appellate counsel to file, within TEN DAYS of the date of this order,
    an amended motion to withdraw that verifies appellate counsel fully complied with the
    requirements of Kelly v. State.
    We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to Tara Cunningham and the Dallas
    County District Attorney’s Office.
    /s/     CRAIG STODDART
    JUSTICE
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-17-00757-CR

Filed Date: 3/12/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 3/14/2018