Narrative Opinion Summary
In a procedural matter before the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, the appellant, David Schlittler, has moved to file a post-argument brief subsequent to the oral arguments presented on May 20, 2015. The appellant's motion is driven by the need to clarify issues arising from the oral arguments, specifically concerning the implications of fundamental rights, the distinction between applied and facial challenges to statutes, and the class definition as outlined under Article 62.001(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The proposed brief is limited to ten pages and aims to provide focused clarification rather than reiterate existing arguments. Notably, the motion is unopposed, as confirmed by a certificate of conference with the State's attorney, Melinda Fletcher. The appellant has adhered to procedural requirements, including document formatting and word count, and has ensured proper service to all relevant parties. The motion reflects a commitment to thoroughness in addressing the appellate court's queries, with the appellant aiming to file the brief by May 29, 2015.
Legal Issues Addressed
Class Definition under Article 62.001(5)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant intends to clarify issues regarding the class definition under the pertinent criminal procedure code article.
Reasoning: Schlittler argues that additional clarification is needed... and the class definition under Article 62.001(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Legal Clarification on Fundamental Rightssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant argues for additional clarification on issues related to fundamental rights as raised during oral arguments.
Reasoning: Schlittler argues that additional clarification is needed regarding questions posed by the Court during the oral arguments, particularly concerning the implications of a fundamental right...
Post-Argument Briefs in Appellate Proceduresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant seeks permission to file a post-argument brief to address specific questions raised during oral arguments.
Reasoning: David Schlittler, the Appellant, seeks permission to file an Appellant's Post-Argument Brief following oral arguments heard by the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas on May 20, 2015.
Procedural Compliance in Appellate Motionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The motion complies with procedural rules, evidenced by certificates of conference, compliance, and service.
Reasoning: The motion is supported by a certificate of conference indicating that the State's attorney, Melinda Fletcher, does not oppose the motion, and a certificate of compliance confirming adherence to appellate procedure rules regarding document formatting and word count.
Statutory Challenges: Applied vs. Facialsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant seeks to address whether the challenge to the statute should be considered on an applied or facial basis.
Reasoning: Schlittler argues that additional clarification is needed... the nature of the challenge to the statute (applied vs. facial)...