Court Opinion

ID: 9391776
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-03 07:10:04.980058+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:08.016046
License: Public Domain

In the
              Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

                  No. 06-18-00198-CR

     EDWIN ANTONIO OSORIO-LOPEZ, Appellant

                           V.

           THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

         On Appeal from the 115th District Court
                Upshur County, Texas
                Trial Court No. 17927

     Before Stevens, C.J., van Cleef and Rambin, JJ.
   Memorandum Opinion on Remand by Justice van Cleef
                          MEMORANDUM OPINION ON REMAND

        Following a retrospective competency trial, the trial court determined that Edwin Antonio

Osorio-Lopez was competent at his trial of conviction.1                   On appeal before this Court, we

determined that the right to self-representation did not apply at the retrospective competency trial

and that, as a result, the trial court erred in permitting Osorio-Lopez’s attorney to withdraw

without appointing new counsel to represent him at the retrospective competency trial. Osorio-

Lopez v. State, 629 S.W.3d 487, 493 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2021), rev’d, 2022 WL 2335394

(Tex. Crim. App. June 29, 2022). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that this Court

erred in reaching the self-representation issue because the trial court did not deny Osorio-

Lopez’s request to represent himself. Osorio-Lopez v. State, 2022 WL 2335394, at *1.

        Having so concluded, and having rejected Osorio-Lopez’s statutory arguments, the Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals remanded to this Court to determine “whether Appellant was

competent to waive counsel, and if so, whether he did so voluntarily, knowingly, and

intelligently.” The court continued, “Part of the latter inquiry requires examining the self-

representation warnings. If they are insufficient, we have suggested that error might be subject

to a harm analysis.” Id. at *5 (citing Williams v. State, 252 S.W.3d 353, 358 n.38 (Tex. Crim.

App. 2008)).

1
 Osorio-Lopez was convicted of evading arrest or detention with a vehicle and aggravated assault with a deadly
weapon and was sentenced to concurrent ten-year and twenty-year sentences, respectively. See TEX. PENAL CODE
ANN. § 38.04(b)(2)(A), § 22.02 (Supp.) In companion cause number 06-18-00197-CR, Osorio-Lopez appeals the
trial court’s retrospective competency determination in connection with his conviction of evading arrest or detention
with a vehicle.
                                                         2
       We addressed these issues in our opinion in Osorio-Lopez’s companion appeal, cause

number 06-18-00197-CR, styled Edwin Antonio Osorio-Lopez v. The State of Texas. For the

reasons expressed in that opinion, we find that, in this case, Osorio-Lopez is, likewise, entitled to

a new retrospective competency trial.

       We reverse the trial court’s competency determination and remand for a new

retrospective competency trial. The trial court is instructed to appoint counsel—who will not be

a potential witness at that trial—to represent Osorio-Lopez at the retrospective competency trial.

                                              Charles van Cleef
                                              Justice

Date Submitted:        March 28, 2023
Date Decided:          April 28, 2023

Do Not Publish

                                                 3