Corey James Bravo v. State ( 2014 )

Opinion issued September 25, 2014
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-12-00923-CR
———————————
COREY JAMES BRAVO, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from County Criminal Court at Law No. 2
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Case No. 1788210
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On August 16, 2012, Corey James Bravo was convicted of the misdemeanor
offense of driving while intoxicated 1 and the trial court assessed his punishment at
three days’ confinement in county jail and a $500 fine. Bravo timely appealed.
1
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 49.04 (West Supp. 2014).
On December 19, 2012, this Court abated the appeal and remanded the case
to the trial court. In the order of abatement, we noted that, although four months
had passed since Bravo filed his notice of appeal, no attorney had appeared in this
Court on Bravo’s behalf. We further noted that although Bravo was represented by
retained counsel in the trial court, Bravo’s counsel did not sign the notice of
appeal, thereby indicating that counsel did not intend to represent Bravo on appeal.
Bravo signed the notice of appeal himself. Because the record did not
contain any indication that Bravo had been admonished regarding the dangers and
disadvantages of proceeding pro se or that he had made an intelligent and
voluntary waiver of the right to counsel on appeal, we abated the appeal and
remanded the case to the trial court with instructions to immediately conduct a
hearing on the record in order to determine, inter alia, whether Bravo still wished
to appeal his DWI conviction, and if so, whether Bravo was indigent. If the trial
court determined that Bravo was not indigent, we instructed the court to admonish
Bravo regarding self-representation, and then either determine that Bravo was
knowingly and intelligently waiving his right to counsel, or set a deadline for
Bravo to hire appellate counsel.
On January 14, 2013, the trial court held a hearing on our abatement order.
The reporter’s record of the hearing shows that (1) Bravo wished to pursue the
appeal, (2) the trial court determined that Bravo was not indigent, (3) Bravo was
2
admonished regarding self-representation, and (4) Bravo intended to represent
himself on appeal. We reinstated the appeal on January 23, 2013.
The reporter’s record was filed on March 1, 2013, and Bravo’s brief was
due on May 1, 2013. On May 17, 2013, the Clerk of this Court notified Bravo that
his brief had not yet been filed and directed him to respond by filing his brief and a
motion for extension of time no later than May 23, 2013. When Bravo did not
respond, the Clerk of this Court again notified him that his brief had not been filed
and directed Bravo to respond by filing his brief and a motion for extension of time
no later than July 1, 2013.
On May 15, 2014, the Court ordered Bravo to file his brief within ten days
of the date of the order or else the Court would consider the appeal without briefs.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b)(4) (stating that “[i]f the trial court has found that the
appellant . . . is not indigent but has not made the necessary arrangements for filing
a brief, the appellate court may consider the appeal without briefs, as justice may
require”). Bravo’s appellate brief was due May 26, 2014. To date, no brief has
been filed. Absent briefs, no issues are presented for our review. Nevertheless, in
the interest of justice, we have reviewed the record before us on appeal for
unassigned fundamental error. See Lott v. State, 874 S.W.2d 687, 688 (Tex. Crim.
App. 1994) (reviewing appeal for unassigned fundamental error when appellant
failed to file brief on appeal); see also Wade v. State, 31 S.W.3d 723, 725 (Tex.
3
App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d) (same). Finding no unassigned
fundamental error, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Jim Sharp
Justice
Panel consists of Justices Higley, Bland, and Sharp.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
4