IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL A
MARCH 20, 2007
______________________________IN THE INTEREST OF A. N. B., A CHILD _________________________________
FROM THE 349TH DISTRICT COURT OF ANDERSON COUNTY;
NO. 349-5615; HONORABLE PAM FOSTER FLETCHER, JUDGE _______________________________
Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.
ORDERAppellant, Sheila K. Barnes, appeals an order allowing appellant's attorney to withdraw.
Currently pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas (Abilene), #03-10337-rlj13, is a bankruptcy proceeding wherein appellant is the debtor.
Pursuant to Rule 8.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, the appeal is suspended. For administrative purposes, the appeal is removed from the docket and abated. Any documents filed subsequent to the bankruptcy petition will remain pending until the appeal is reinstated. The appeal will be reinstated upon proper showing from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas that the stay has been lifted and a request for specific action by this Court. Tex. R. App. P. 8.3(a).
Accordingly, the appeal is abated.
Per Curiam
back to the trial court because the motion to dismiss was erroneously filed in that court and the withdrawal did not include the signature of appellant as required by Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2 for a voluntary dismissal in a criminal case. Furthermore, although we had requested by letter that counsel for appellant file a motion to dismiss with the clerk of this court, no such motion was filed. We therefore requested the trial court to determine whether appellant wished to continue to prosecute his appeal.
We have since received findings of fact and conclusions of law from the trial court and a transcript of the proceeding held in that court. The record shows that, since the date that appellant filed his motion to dismiss his pro se notice of appeal, he was indicted on another charge arising out of the same incident, and the State agreed to dismiss that charge in exchange for appellant dismissing the appeal that is currently before this court. Appellant affirmed on the record that he wished to accept the State's offer, and it was his intent to withdraw his notice of appeal.
We have the authority, pursuant to Rule 2 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, to suspend the operation of Rule 42.2(a) for this appeal only, and find that appellant has voluntarily dismissed his appeal by virtue of his testimony during the hearing and despite his lack of compliance with that rule. See Conners v. State, 966 S.W.2d 108, 110-11 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1998, pet. ref'd). Therefore, because the record shows appellant no longer wishes to pursue his appeal, it is hereby dismissed.
John T. Boyd
Chief Justice
Do not publish.