COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Donnell V. Phillips Jr. v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-13-00622-CR

Trial court case number: 1365648

Trial court: 180th District Court of Harris County

Appellant, Donnell V. Phillips, appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion to 

suppress his oral statements made to law enforcement and the evidence found in his vehicle. He 

states that he “was not read his Miranda warnings before being questioned by the officer.”

The record shows that the trial court held a hearing outside the presence of the jury, at 

which the parties litigated the issue of whether appellant was “in custody” at the time he made 

the statements at issue to the law enforcement officer in this case. Afterwards, the trial court 

signed an order denying appellant’s motion to suppress.

The record does not reflect that the trial court made findings of fact or conclusions of law 

related to appellant’s motion to suppress as required. Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 

38.22, section 6, provides in pertinent part:

If [a] statement has been found to have been voluntarily made and held admissible 

as a matter of law and fact by the court in a hearing in the absence of the jury, the 

court must enter an order stating its conclusion as to whether or not the statement 

was voluntarily made, along with the specific finding of facts upon which the 

conclusion was based, which order shall be filed among the papers of the cause.

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 38.22, § 6 (Vernon Supp. 2014); Urias v. State, 155 S.W.3d 141, 

142 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (“It is well settled that Article 38.22, § 6 ‘is mandatory in its 

language and that it requires a trial court to file its findings of fact and conclusions of law’” 

without regard to whether defendant objects to their absence). It is not necessary that the 

findings be made “with minute specificity as to every alleged and hypothetical possibility for 

physical or mental coercion. But the trial court must make findings of fact and conclusions of 

law adequate to provide an appellate court with a basis upon which to review the trial court’s 

application of the law to the facts.” Wicker v. State, 740 S.W.2d 779, 783 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1987).
A trial court may satisfy the requirements of article 38.22 by dictating its findings and 

conclusions into a reporter’s record that is included in the appellate record. Mbugua v. State, 312 

S.W.3d 657, 668 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009, pet. ref’d) (citing Murphy v. State, 112 

S.W.3d 592, 601–02 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003)). Here, the parties have not directed us to, and we 

have not found, any specific findings or conclusions as to voluntariness in either the clerk’s 

record or reporter’s record.

When a trial court fails to make findings of fact and conclusions of law in compliance 

with article 38.22, section 6, we must abate the appeal and remand the cause to permit 

compliance with the statute. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 38.22, § 6; Urias, 155 

S.W.3d at 142 (remanding to court of appeals with instructions to require compliance); Wicker, 

740 S.W.2d at 784. Accordingly, we abate the appeal and remand the case for the trial court to 

enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law, separate and apart from any docket sheet 

notations in this case, in conjunction with its denial of appellant’s motion to suppress. The trial 

court may review the reporter’s record to refresh its recollection of the reasons for its rulings on 

the issue of voluntariness. Wicker, 740 S.W.2d at 784. The trial court shall cause its findings 

and conclusions to be filed with the trial court clerk within 20 days of the date of this order. 

We further order the trial court clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial 

court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law with this Court within 30 days of the date of this

order.

This appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this Court’s active 

docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this Court’s active docket without further order of the 

Court when the supplemental clerk’s record is filed in this Court.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: October 28, 2014