Opinion

Abraham Raymundo Martinez v. State

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)
Filed
Dec 29, 2016
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 3.4%

The opinion

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Abraham Raymundo Martinez v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-16-00714-CR

Trial court case number: 1467161

Trial court: 208th District Court

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed a brief concluding that the above-

referenced appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S. Ct.

1396, 1400 (1967). Appellant, acting pro se, has filed a motion requesting access to a

copy of the appellate record for use in preparing a response to appointed counsel’s brief.

See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 315, 318–20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Appellant has

also filed a motion for extension of time to file his pro se response.

We grant the motion for access and order the trial court clerk, no later than 10

days from the date of this order, to provide a copy of the record, including the clerk’s

record, the reporter’s record, and any supplemental records, to the appellant. The trial

court clerk shall further certify to this Court, within 15 days of the date of this order, the

date upon which delivery of the record to the appellant is made. Finally, appellant’s

motion for extension of time to file his response to his appointed counsel’s brief is

granted and the deadline is extended until February 21, 2017.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown

 Acting individually

Date: _December 29, 2016

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.