In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
______________________________
No. 06-09-00003-CR
______________________________
KAREN ROBERTS, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 76th Judicial District Court
Titus County, Texas
Trial Court No. CR 14443
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.
Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Karen Roberts appeals from her conviction of indecency with a child. See TEX . PENAL CODE
ANN . § 21.11(a)(1) (Vernon 2003). She was sentenced to ten years' confinement and a fine of
$10,000.00. Roberts is not indigent.
Roberts filed her notice of appeal November 7, 2008. The clerk's record was filed
February 13, 2009, and the reporter's record was due December 19, 2008, and has not been filed.
Roberts's retained attorney filed a motion to withdraw, stating that he had been entirely unable to
convince Roberts to cooperate, communicate, stay in contact with him, or sign the certification of
right to appeal. Counsel further detailed in his motion the difficulties he encountered in attempting
to contact Roberts, or to obtain direction from her concerning the continuation or termination of her
appeal. Counsel mailed a copy of that motion to Roberts, and also met all the requirements of
Rule 6.5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX . R. APP . P. 6.5. On February 24, 2009,
this Court granted counsel's motion to withdraw. On that same date, this Court also mailed a letter
to the last known address Roberts had provided to counsel providing Roberts with ten days in which
to retain different counsel to pursue the appeal or to take other action showing her continuing
intention to effectively pursue this appeal, and informed Roberts that if she had not contacted this
Court within ten days of the date of our letter with such information, the appeal would be subject to
dismissal for want of prosecution.
2
Roberts has not contacted this Court. The reporter's record is now over three months past
due, and she has not contacted the reporter to make arrangements to pay for the record. She has not
filed a brief based on the clerk's record alone. She has not retained different counsel to represent her
on appeal.
Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Stavinoha v. State, 82
S.W.3d 690, 691 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002, no pet.); Bush v. State, 80 S.W.3d 199, 200 (Tex.
App.—Waco 2002, no pet.); see also McDaniel v. State, 75 S.W.3d 605, 605–06 (Tex.
App.—Texarkana 2002, no pet.); Rodriguez v. State, 970 S.W.2d 133, 135 (Tex. App.—Amarillo
1998, pet. ref'd).
Bailey C. Moseley
Justice
Date Submitted: April 9, 2009
Date Decided: April 10, 2009
Do Not Publish
3