Narrative Opinion Summary
On December 19, 2012, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas issued an order concerning Lawrence Frank Crouse's appeal against the State of Texas. The court reaffirmed the trial court's finding that Crouse is indigent and had previously set a deadline for his brief to be filed by November 26, 2012. Since neither Crouse's brief nor any communication from his counsel has been received, the court mandated that Crouse must file his brief by January 2, 2013. Failure to comply will result in the removal of his appointed attorney, Roy Reeves, and the appointment of new counsel for the appeal. The court directed the Clerk to electronically transmit copies of the order to the presiding judge of the trial court and to all parties' counsel.
Legal Issues Addressed
Consequences for Non-Compliance with Filing Deadlinessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court warned that failure to meet the extended brief filing deadline would result in the removal of the appointed attorney and the appointment of new counsel.
Reasoning: Failure to comply will result in the removal of his appointed attorney, Roy Reeves, and the appointment of new counsel for the appeal.
Deadline for Filing Appellant's Briefsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court extended the deadline for the indigent appellant, Lawrence Frank Crouse, to file his brief to January 2, 2013, after missing the initial deadline without any communication from his counsel.
Reasoning: Since neither Crouse's brief nor any communication from his counsel has been received, the court mandated that Crouse must file his brief by January 2, 2013.
Indigency Determination in Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reaffirmed the trial court's finding that the appellant, Lawrence Frank Crouse, is indigent, which affects his entitlement to appointed legal representation.
Reasoning: The court reaffirmed the trial court's finding that Crouse is indigent and had previously set a deadline for his brief to be filed by November 26, 2012.
Notification Requirements for Court Orderssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court instructed the Clerk to ensure that copies of the order are electronically transmitted to the presiding judge of the trial court and all parties' counsel.
Reasoning: The court directed the Clerk to electronically transmit copies of the order to the presiding judge of the trial court and to all parties' counsel.