Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Donald Ray Hicks v. State
Citation: Not availableDocket: 07-05-00109-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; February 21, 2006; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Donald Hicks appeals his conviction for burglary of a habitation with intent to commit theft. The court outlines a timeline regarding the filing of records and briefs: the clerk’s record was filed on July 8, 2005, a supplemental record on November 3, 2005, and the reporter’s record on October 21, 2005. Appellant's brief was due by December 5, 2005, but was not filed. After notifying Hicks on December 6, 2005, and receiving no response, the court abated the appeal on December 20, 2005. The appeal was later reinstated following a motion for an extension, with deadlines subsequently set for January 21, 2006, and then February 14, 2006. Despite admonitions against further extensions, counsel filed a third request, citing workload issues, which was denied. The court found that the failure to file a brief constituted a denial of effective assistance of counsel, as established in Evitts v. Lucey. Consequently, the case is remanded to the trial court to determine if Hicks is indigent and wishes to proceed with the appeal. If so, the trial court must relieve current counsel Kelly Clark and appoint new representation. The court requires the order appointing new counsel to be filed in a supplemental record by March 15, 2006, with the option for the trial court to request additional time if necessary.