Court Opinion

ID: 3107196
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-10-16 06:12:06.096924+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:27:28.273164
License: Public Domain

NUMBER 13-10-00403-CR

                           COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                    CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

JACOB MORALES,                                                            Appellant,

                                          v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                 Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

              On appeal from the 36th District Court
                 of San Patricio County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION

 Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides
                 Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

      Appellant, Jacob Morales, was convicted of possession with intent to deliver

cocaine.   On July 29, 2010, appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal.     Appellant’s

appointed counsel in the trial court advised this Court that he was not retained or

appointed to represent appellant on appeal. On February 10, 2011, this Court abated

the appeal and ordered the trial court to determine whether appellant desired to

prosecute this appeal and whether appellant is indigent and entitled to court-appointed
counsel.

      At the trial court hearing, appellant stated that he did not wish to continue with his

appeal and wanted to withdraw his appeal. Appellant’s trial court counsel has filed

motion to dismiss the appeal that does not contain the appellant’s signature. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.2 (a). Although no written motion has been filed in compliance with Rule

42.2(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we conclude that good cause exists to

suspend the operation of Rule 42.2(a) in this case in accordance with Rule 2. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 2.   Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED and the appeal is

DISMISSED.

                                                        PER CURIAM

Do not publish.
See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed the
24th day of March, 2011.

                                            2