Court Opinion

ID: 9665892
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 00:59:05.13089+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:20.212752
License: Public Domain

GRAY, Justice,
dissenting.
This is the second motion to withdraw that has been filed by counsel. The first was denied by the Fifth Court of Appeals before this case was transferred to this court. The motion was denied because it was defective. This motion is also defective. Counsel does not assert that Turner has been notified of his right to object to the motion. Tex.R.App. P. 6.5.
Further, the motion offers no reason that the motion should be granted. While it does assert that Turner is indigent, it does not assert that Counsel has not already been paid for the services or that there is some compelling reason that counsel should be released from his agreement to represent Turner.
The motion also erroneously asserts that granting the motion will not work a delay. It already has caused a delay and ordering this cause abated will cause further delay. According to the motion, the trial court is waiting on our decision on the motion to withdraw before the trial court acts on the motion to appoint counsel. We are now waiting on the trial court before we decide the motion.
I would deny the motion and order retained counsel to prepare and file appellant’s brief, thus compelling counsel to deal with the situation he has created. Because the majority does not, I respectfully dissent.
The issue of a free record is not currently before us. I would not address it and do not join the majority’s discussion related thereto.