Court Opinion

ID: 9680914
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 07:40:58.390405+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:31.286833
License: Public Domain

ABATEMENT ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Boyd Rodgers filed a pro se motion for forensic DNA testing and appointment of counsel under the provisions of chapter 64 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex.Code CRIM. Proc. Ann. arts. 64.01-.05 (Vernon Supp.2002). The court denied the motion, and Rodgers appealed.
Rodgers has filed a motion requesting that we abate this appeal for appointment of counsel. For the reasons expressed in an abatement order we recently issued in Gray v. State, we grant the motion. See Gray v. State, 69 S.W.3d 835, 837 (Tex.App.—Waco 2002, order).
Accordingly, we abate this appeal to the trial court to determine whether Rodgers is indigent. The court shall: (1) conduct a hearing on the question of his status as an indigent person, to be held within twenty-one days after the date of this order; (2) if the court determines that he is indigent, appoint counsel to represent him in this appeal; (3) make and file appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law and cause them to be included in a supplemental clerk’s record; (4) cause the record made at the hearing, if any, to be transcribed and included in a supplemental reporter’s record; and (5) cause these supplemental records to be filed with the Clerk of this Court within seven days after the date of the hearing.
Justice GRAY dissenting.