COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NOS. 02-13-00470-CR

02-13-00471-CR

JOSE LUIS ACOSTA APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

------------

FROM THE 213TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

------------

ABATEMENT ORDER

-----------

The reporter’s record was originally due on November 19, 2013. On 

January 13, 2014, the court granted court reporter Sheila Walker’s request for an 

extension to file the reporter’s record, making the record due February 5, 2014. 

The court stated in this order that no further extensions would be granted. 

On February 13, 2014, and again on April 15, 2014, Walker uploaded a 

reporter’s record via the Texas Appeals Management and E-filing System 

(TAMES) web portal that did not include all exhibits. On both occasions, Walker 
2

attempted to submit the remaining exhibits to the court in their original form 

instead of filing them in an electronic format via the TAMES web portal as 

mandated by appendix C to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure and the 

Uniform Format Manual for Texas Reporters’ Records. 

On May 14, 2014, as authorized by appendix C of the Texas Rules of 

Appellate Procedure, the court posted guidelines for filing reporter’s records to 

the court’s website. On May 15, 2014, the court ordered Walker to file the 

reporter’s record in compliance with appendix C to the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure, the Uniform Format Manual for Texas Reporters’ Records, and the 

guidelines posted on the court’s website on or before May 27, 2014, or to be 

prepared to show cause why she should not be held in contempt. 

The guidelines for reporter’s records posted to the court’s website set forth 

the following procedure for a court reporter to follow when attempting to submit 

exhibits that are unable to be duplicated electronically:

If a court reporter cannot upload a legible electronic copy of an 

exhibit via the TAMES web portal, the court reporter must include 

the exhibit number on a separator page along with the following 

statement: “EXHIBIT UNABLE TO BE DUPLICATED 

ELECTRONICALLY.” In addition, at the same time that the court 

reporter files the reporter’s record, the court reporter must also file 

a motion for leave to submit the exhibits that were unable to be 

duplicated electronically in the form of physical media. This motion 

must attach the court reporter’s sworn affidavit that 1) states that 

the court reporter was unable to file the exhibit electronically and 2) 

details the efforts made by the court reporter in an attempt to file the 

exhibit electronically. Such efforts should include contacting the 

court reporters’ liaison and/or the party that offered the exhibit in the 
3

trial court for assistance in duplicating the file in an electronic format 

suitable for uploading to the TAMES web portal.

Information on Electronic Filing, Second Court of Appeals, 

http://www.2ndcoa.courts.state.tx.us/efiling/efile_news.asp (last updated May 14, 

2014) (emphasis added).

On May 24 and 25, 2014, Walker again uploaded a reporter’s record via 

the TAMES web portal that did not include all exhibits. Specifically, the reporter’s 

record did not duplicate the content of State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83. Despite 

the guidelines’ requirement that Walker file a motion for leave to submit these 

exhibits in the form of physical media, the reporter’s record instead states that 

Walker has filed each of these exhibits with the district clerk’s office. Also 

contrary to the guidelines’ requirements, Walker did not submit her sworn 

affidavit that 1) states that she was unable to file each of these exhibits

electronically and 2) details the efforts that she made in an attempt to file each of 

these exhibits electronically, including contacting the court reporters’ liaison 

and/or the party that offered the exhibits in the trial court for assistance. Thus, 

Walker has failed to file the complete, compliant reporter’s record in a timely 

manner as ordered by this court.

Accordingly, we abate these appeals and remand the cases to the trial 

court. The trial court shall immediately, but no later than 5:00 p.m. on 

Wednesday, June 4, 2014, conduct a hearing with the attorneys of record and 

court reporter Sheila Walker present. Walker shall bring with her to the hearing 
4

State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83. The trial court shall use whatever means are 

required to ensure Walker’s personal appearance at the show cause hearing with 

State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83, including, if necessary, the issuance of a capias. 

Walker is hereby notified that because she faces possible 

confinement and a fine should this court hold her in contempt, she has a 

right to have counsel appear with her in the show cause hearing. At this 

hearing, the trial court shall further admonish Walker of her rights.

Walker shall show cause at this hearing why she should not be held in 

contempt of this court for failing to comply with our May 15, 2014 order. See

Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 21.002 (West 2004). The trial court shall ask Walker to 

detail on the record at the hearing her reasons and motivations for failing to file 

the motion and affidavit in compliance with the guidelines for filing reporter’s 

records as ordered by this court. The trial court shall also determine the 

following on the record at the hearing:

 Whether Walker contends that State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83 cannot be 

electronically duplicated;

 Whether Walker made any efforts to file State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83 

electronically and, if so, what efforts were made;

 Whether Walker contacted the court reporters’ liaison for assistance in 

duplicating State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83 in an electronic format suitable 

for uploading to the TAMES web portal;

 Whether Walker contacted the attorneys for the State for assistance in 

duplicating State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83 in an electronic format suitable 

for uploading to the TAMES web portal; and
5

 When Walker can duplicate State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83 in an electronic 

format suitable for uploading to the TAMES web portal or otherwise follow 

the guidelines and rules referenced above for each exhibit that is unable to 

be duplicated, or whether the duty of filing State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83 

should be reassigned to another court reporter. If the trial court 

determines that a reassignment is necessary, the trial court shall reassign 

the duty, set a deadline for filing the exhibits in compliance with the abovereferenced rules and guidelines no later than fourteen days after the date 

of the hearing on this matter, notify the replacement court reporter in 

writing, or on the record at the hearing, of the reassignment and deadline, 

and immediately transfer State’s Exhibits 49, 82, and 83 from Walker to the 

newly assigned reporter.

The trial court shall make all findings necessary to aid this court in 

determining whether to hold Walker in contempt and shall file a record of the 

hearing in this court on or before Friday, June 27, 2014. This record of the 

hearing shall include a supplemental clerk’s record and supplemental reporter’s 

record. On our receipt of the supplemental record from the hearing, the appeal 

of this cause shall be automatically reinstated without further order. After the 

appeal is reinstated, we shall determine whether to hold Sheila Walker in 

contempt.

The clerk of this court shall transmit a copy of this order to court reporter 

Sheila Walker via certified mail return receipt requested and electronic mail, the 

attorneys of record, the trial court clerk, and the trial court judge.

DATED May 28, 2014.

/s/ Lee Ann Dauphinot

LEE ANN DAUPHINOT

JUSTICE