Opinion
No. 04-16-00559-CR
11-17-2017
Stanley Foster BAKER, Appellant v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas
Trial Court No. 15-1755-CR-A
Honorable W.C. Kirkendall, Judge Presiding
ORDER
Appellant is an inmate representing himself in this appeal, but with court-appointed standby counsel. On May 5, 2017, before all the volumes of the reporter's record were filed, Appellant filed a pro se brief.
In our May 17, 2017 order, we warned Appellant that his May 5, 2017 pro se brief was replete with formal and substantive defects. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.1, 38.9. We warned Appellant that the defects made his brief subject to being struck, or, at a minimum, for multiple issues to be waived for failure to adequately brief the issue. See, e.g., id. R. 38.1(i).
We granted Appellant's motion for a thirty-day extension of time to file an amended brief until May 31, 2017. We advised Appellant that "there is no Texas constitutional right to appellate self-representation." Cormier v. State, 85 S.W.3d 496, 498 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002, order); see Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist., 528 U.S. 152, 163 (2000) (recognizing that states may allow appellants to represent themselves in criminal appeals).
We cautioned Appellant that if he failed to file his pro se amended brief by May 31, 2017, we would order court-appointed appellate counsel to file a brief on Appellant's behalf. See Cormier, 85 S.W.3d at 498 (refusing to allow appellant to proceed pro se on appeal because it would not be in his best interest).
In our June 9, 2017 order, after Appellant failed to timely file a pro se brief as ordered, we ordered court-appointed standby counsel Chris Iles to file a brief on Appellant's behalf. After several delays in filing the brief, on October 25, 2017, counsel filed a brief on Appellant's behalf.
On November 13, 2017, Appellant filed a pro se request for this court "to accept [A]ppellant's pro se brief (filed 05/05/17) as a supplement to the appella[te] brief filed by my attorney (Chris Iles) as justice requires."
Appellant had the opportunity to file an amended pro se brief, but even after being ordered to do so, he did not. Thereafter, Appellant had over four months to consult with his court-appointed attorney to ensure that any points Appellant wished to be considered by this court were incorporated into the brief prepared by his standby counsel.
Appellant's pro se motion for this court to accept Appellant's pro se brief filed on May 5, 2017, as a supplement to the brief filed by Appellant's counsel on October 25, 2017, is DENIED.
/s/_________
Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 17th day of November, 2017.
/s/_________
KEITH E. HOTTLE,
Clerk of Court