Court Opinion

ID: 2927221
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-11 22:49:02.604272+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:07.421852
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-08-00394-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________
 
LEE RAY GARCIA,	Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,	Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 214th District Court of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Yañez and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

	Appellant, Lee Ray Garcia, was convicted of possession of a controlled substance. 
On June 20, 2008, appellant filed a notice of appeal by and through his attorney.  Counsel
for appellant subsequently filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and the trial court
appointed new counsel, David Fast.  On January 22, 2009, this Court abated the appeal
because of counsel's failure to file a brief and ordered the trial court to determine whether
appellant desired to prosecute this appeal.
	At the trial court hearing, counsel appeared and stated that appellant had authorized 
counsel to dismiss the case, but that appellant could not be located.  Counsel said that he
filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, but was informed by this Court that it could not be
dismissed without appellant's signature. (1) See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2 (a). At the hearing it
was established that appellant had been released from jail, was not on parole or on
probation, and that all attempts to locate the appellant had been exhausted.
	Based upon the evidence at the hearing that appellant does not want to continue
his appeal, we conclude that good cause exists to suspend the operation of Rule 42.2(a)
in this case.  See Tex. R. App. P. 2.   Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

								PER CURIAM

Do not publish.  See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).  
Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed
this 19th day of March, 2009.

1. The Court's records do not indicate that counsel for appellant filed a written motion to dismiss the
appeal.