NO. 07-08 -051 3-CR IN THE CO UR T OF APPEA LS FO R THE S EVEN TH D ISTRI CT O F TEXAS

AT AM AR ILLO PAN EL B JU NE 9, 2009

_________

_________

_________

___ DA NI EL LU IS C AN CI NO , Appel lan t

v. THE S TATE OF TEXAS, Appel lee

_________

_________

_________

______ FRO M T HE 69 th DIS T RI CT COU RT OF DA L L AM COU NT Y; NO. 404 6; HON. RON ENNS, PRESIDING

_________

_________

_________

____ ON ABA TEMENT AND REMAN D

_________

_________

_________

____ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. App ellantapp eals f rom h is convi ction for agg rav ate d ass a u lt

. T he clerk’s record
w as filed on D ecember 22, 200 8, an d the repor ter ’s record on Febr uar y 24, 2009. Appel lan t’ s b ri ef was due on M arch 26, 2 009. N eit her a br ief nor

a mot ion for e xtens ion
w as filed by

thatdate , how e ver. On A p ri l 2, 20 09, t he c our t s ent a l etter

to appel lan t noti fyi ng hi m thatthe br ief w as ov erdue and thati t or a response w as due on Apr il 13, 2009. On Apr il 13, 2009, appel lan t fil ed a moti on for extens ion of ti me to file the b ri ef. Itw as grant ed, and the dea dline w as extende d to M ay 11, 200 9. On M a y 1 2 , 2 0 0 9 , this

Cou rtrecei v ed appe ll ant’ s mo ti on to w it hdraw as co unsel , s tati ng that“ no non- frivolo us g ro unds for appe al” w ere found. The Cou rt deni ed couns el’ s moti on to w it hdraw on M ay 20, 200 9, sta ting “the mo tion to w ithdra w cann ot be g rante d un til coun s e l satisf ies his educa ti onal burdens, [and ] fil es an Anders b ri e f

. . . T h e b ri e f

i s d u e n o l a t e r t h a n Mo n d a y, June 1, 20 09.” To dat e, no br ief has been filed

. Conse quently, w e ab ate the ap pea l and rema nd the ca use to the 69th Distri ct Court (trial court) fo r fu rther proce edin gs. Upon rema nd, the trial court sha ll i mm edia tely cause noti ce of a hear ing to be g iv en and, thereafter, co nducta he ar ing t o d e te rmine t he fo llo wing: 1. w hether

appel lan t i s i ndi g ent; 2. w het her ap pellan t desires to prosecu te th e ap pea l; 3

. w hether

appel lan t has been deni e d the eff ect iv e ass is tanc e of couns el due to a p p ell ate c ounse l’ s fai lure to ti mely fil e an appel lat e br ief. See Evitts

v. Luc ey, 469 U .S. 387, 394, 105 S. C t. 830, 8 34- 35, 83 L . Ed.2 d 82 1, 82 8 (198 5) (holding thatan indigen td e fend antis enti tl ed to the effect iv e assi sta nce of couns el on th e first appeal as of ri g ht a n d that c ounse l must be av ail abl e to ass is t i n prepar ing and subm itting an app ellate brief ). W e furt her

di re ct the t ri al cour

t t o i ss ue findi ng s o f fa ct and c oncl usi ons of law address ing the foreg oin g su bje cts

. Shoul d the t rial co urt find that appel lan t des ires to p u rs u e t h e a p p e a l, is in d ig e n t , a n d h a s b e e n d e n ie d e f fe c t ive a s s is t a n c e o f

co u n s e l, we further di re ct itto appoi nt ne w co unsel to ass is t i n the pros e cution of the appe al. The
nam e, add ress, pho ne num ber, telefax nu mb er, and st ate bar num ber of the ne w coun sel, if an y, who w ill rep re se n t a p p e lla n t o n ap p e a l m u stal so be in clu d e d in th e co u rt ’s f in d in gs of factand conc lus ion s o f law

. Fur ther more, the tr ial co u rtsh all al so caus e to bedev elo ped 1)a s uppl emental cl er k’ s record contai nin g the findi ng s of factand conc lus ion s

of law and 2) a repor

ter ’s record transc ri bin g the ev ide nce and arg ument present ed atthe aforem ent ione d hea ring. Add itiona lly , the trial court shall cause the sup plem ent al clerk’s
re cord to be fil ed w it h the cl er k of this co urt on or before Jul y

9, 2009. Shoul d addi ti onal time be ne ede d to pe rform th ese tasks, the trial court may req uestsame on or before July 9, 20 09. It is so ordered.

Per C ur iam Do not p ubl is h.