NO. 07-06-0255-CR IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL B FEBRUARY

15, 2007

______________________________ FRANCISCOPERALTA, Appellant

v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE 242 ND DISTRIC T COURT O F CASTRO COUNTY; NO. B2696-0008; HON. ED SELF, PRESI DING

_______________________________ Memorandum Opinion

_______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Franc isco Per alta filed a noti ce of appeal from an order revoking his probatio n. Appellant’s retained counsel soug ht to withdraw claiming his client had failed to meet his obligations

pursuant to an empl oyment agr eement and failed to pay the expenses for t he clerk’s and reporter’s

records as well asa supplemental r eporter’s r

ecord. We abated the appeal for the trial court to deter mine whether appellant desi red to prosecu te the appeal and whether he was indi gent and entitl ed to a ppointed counsel and a free record on2

appeal. After a hearing on November 9, 2006, the tri al court made findi ngs that appel lant desired to prosecute his appeal, did not w ish to have counsel appointed, was not i ndigent, and would be ab le to reta in couns el within 30 days. At th at hear ing, appellant repr esented he would need 30days toobtain counsel and was w arned by the trial cour

t that he needed to obtain a law

yer as so on as possible . We then reinstated the appeal and grante d counsel’s moti on to withdr aw. By letter dated N ovember 21, 2006, we notified appellant that his bri ef was due 30 days from that

date. On Januar

y 3, 2007, w

e again notified appellant that a brief had not been received and that he had until Januar y 16, 2007 to fil e one. On January 16, 2007, appellant

requested an extension of the deadline because h e was sti ll “looki ng for an attorney.”On January 17, 2007, we notified appellant that hi s brief was to be filed on January 31, 2007, or the a ppeal would be submitted to the court wi thout briefs. To date , neither a brief nor any

correspondence from appellant or an y coun sel h e ma y have retained has been received. When the appellant’s brief remains outsta nding, the appellant i s not indig ent, and he has failed to make the necessar y arrang ements for filing a brief, the appellate cour t may consider the appeal wi thout briefs as j ustice may require. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 38.8(b)(4). Here, the tri al c ourt

fo und ap pellant was not indigent and that he would make the necessary arrangements for filing hi s brief. Nevertheless, he has not done so. W hile we believe that no accused should be denie d his right of app eal, justice requiresthat the exer

cise of the right toappeal must be hel d within the framework of the rules of appellate proce dure. Jones v. State , No. 14-04-01 123-CR, 2005 Tex . App. L EXIS 6410 at *3 (Tex. Ap p.–Housto n [14 th Dist.] Aug ust 11, 2005, no pet. ) (not desig nated for3

publication). Furthermore , requir ing any appellant to follow the rules does not i nfringe upon his right of appeal

. Id. at 3-4. Therefore, justice requires that this appeal be determined wi thou t a brief. Having sua spontereview ed the entire appel late record and fo und no er ror, we affirm the final judg ment of the trial court. See id. (affirming the judgment); Clark v. State , No. 10-03-0268-C R, 2005 Tex. App . L EXIS 30 85 at *2 (Tex. App.–Waco, April 20, 2005, no pet.) (not designated f or publication) (affirming the judgment).

Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish

.