C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

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

Appellate case number: 01

- 13

- 00 622

- 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 q uestioned 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 wa s “in custody” at the time he made

the statements at issue to the law enforcem ent officer in this case. Afterwards, t he trial court signed an order denying appellant’s motion to suppress.

The record does not reflect that the trial court mad e 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 volunt arily 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.

T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. art. 38.22, § 6 (Vernon Supp. 201 4 ); Urias v. State , 155 S.W.3d 141, 142 (Tex. Crim. A pp. 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 defen dant objects to their absence). It is not nece ssar y 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 basi s 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 repor ter’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 t o , and we have not found, any specific finding s or conclusion s 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 T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. 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 c onjunction with it s denial of appellant’s motion to su ppress. 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 t rial 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 Cour t.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: October 28 , 2014