Court Opinion

ID: 9365098
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-21 13:10:25.194163+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:43.238508
License: Public Domain

NO. 12-22-00180-CR

                          IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

               TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

                                     TYLER, TEXAS

REGINALD MONTRELIA                               §      APPEAL FROM THE 114TH
WICKWARE,
APPELLANT
                                                 §      JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                              §      SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS
APPELLEE

                                     PER CURIAM ORDER
       Reginald Montrelia Wickware appeals from his conviction for aggravated sexual assault
of a child. According to the case information sheet from the Smith County District Clerk’s
Office, Appellant was found indigent in the trial court. Although the trial court appointed
counsel to represent Appellant on appeal, Appellant retained counsel. In his letter requesting
preparation of the reporter’s record, Appellant’s retained counsel, Niles Illich, stated, “Defendant
will make arrangements with the court reporter to pay the court reporter’s fee.” The reporter’s
record was originally due on October 20. On January 9, 2023, the reporter filed a fourth motion
for extension of time to file the record, in which she informed this Court that the delay in filing
the record is due to non-payment of the required preparation fee. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(b)(3).
In response, Illich explained that the trial court initially appointed counsel, but Appellant’s
family retained Illich and Appellant remains indigent. On January 18, the reporter filed a fifth
motion for extension, in which she again explained the need for more time to prepare the record
due to payment issues. She attached an email to her motion, in which the trial court coordinator
stated that Appellant would have to pay for his own record.
       If an appellant is unable to pay for the appellate record, he may, by motion and affidavit,
ask the trial court to furnish the record without charge. TEX. R. APP. P. 20.2. For purposes of
qualifying as indigent to receive a free copy of the appellate record, a defendant must be unable
to pay or give security for the record. McFatridge v. State, 309 S.W.3d 1, 5 (Tex. Crim. App.
2010). Indigency determinations are made when raised and are decided on a case-by-case basis.
Id. “Determining indigency for purposes of appointing counsel and indigency for purposes of
obtaining a free record are discrete inquiries[.]” Id. at 5-6. “A defendant can be found indigent
for one purpose without being found indigent for the other.” Id. at 6.
         Here, the clerk’s record does not reflect that Appellant filed a motion requesting a free
appellate record or that the trial court found Appellant indigent for purposes of obtaining a free
record. Accordingly,
         It is ORDERED that the Honorable Austin R. Jackson shall conduct a hearing, on or
before February 2, 2023, and make written findings of fact and conclusions of law as to
whether (1) Appellant is indigent and entitled to a copy of the reporter’s record without charge,
and (2) if Appellant is not so entitled, the date he will make acceptable payment arrangements
for the reporter’s record.1
         It is FURTHER ORDERED that a supplemental clerk’s record including any necessary
findings of fact and conclusions of law, along with any supporting documentation and orders, be
certified to this Court on or before February 9, 2023.
         It is FURTHER ORDERED that the court reporter file a reporter’s record of the hearing
on or before February 9, 2023.
         GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF SAID COURT, at my office this 20th
day of January 2023, A.D.

                                             By: _____________________________
                                                 KATRINA MCCLENNY, CLERK

         1
           See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(a)(2) (if reporter’s record has not been timely filed, appellate court must make
whatever order is appropriate to avoid further delay and to preserve parties’ rights); see also Goley v. State, No. 07-
18-00145-CR, 2018 WL 3766796, at *1-2 (Tex. App.—Amarillo Aug. 8, 2018, order) (per curiam) (where appellant
was declared indigent and appointed counsel, but later retained counsel, appellate court remanded for trial court to
consider whether appellant was entitled to free reporter’s record).