in Re Ronnie Gene Long, Relator

NO. 07-08-0177-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

MAY 20, 2008

______________________________

IN RE RONNIE GENE LONG, RELATOR

_______________________________

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Relator, Ronnie Gene Long, filed his Application for Writ of Mandamus on March 28, 2008, contending that the trial court denied his Motion Nunc Pro Tunc. However, Long did not include in the appendix to his application a “certified or sworn copy of any order complained of, or any other document showing the matter complained of.” Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(j)(A).

           Additionally, Long did not pay the filing fee required under Rule 5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. By letter from this Court, dated April 24, 2008, we advised Long that the “filing fee in the amount of $125.00 did not accompany the captioned original proceeding. Unless the filing fee is paid by Monday, May 5, 2008, this proceeding will be subject to dismissal.” Tex. R. App. P. 5. Long has not paid the fee as directed nor has he filed an affidavit of indigence. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1.

          Accordingly, we dismiss Long’s petition. See In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225 (Tex.App.–Amarillo 2001, orig. proceeding).

 

 

                                                                Mackey K. Hancock

                                                                         Justice

o Spacing"/>

NO. 07-10-0489-CR

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

 

AT AMARILLO

 

PANEL D

 

JULY 15, 2011

___________________________

 

CARLOS LAMONT FISHER, JR., 

 

                                                                                         Appellant

v.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

 

                                                                                         Appellee

___________________________

 

FROM THE 223RD DISTRICT COURT OF GRAY COUNTY;

 

NO. 7369; HONORABLE LEE WATERS, PRESIDING

___________________________

 

Abatement and Remand

___________________________

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

            On July 6, 2011, we granted the State’s agreed Motion to Correct the Reporter’s Record and ordered the court reporter to file a supplemental record making the changes approved.  However, the court reporter notified this court that he could not certify the record with the agreed change since the event did not occur at trial and was not part of the trial record. 

            The change requested by the State and agreed to by appellant concerns defendant’s trial exhibit one, which is several forms filed under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IADA).  However, according to the State’s motion, not all of the pages were attached to the forms that were admitted at trial.

 Accordingly, we abate this cause back to the trial court.  Upon remand, it is directed to determine whether the exhibits tendered by the parties and accepted into evidence at trial are the ones actually included in the record developed by the court reporter.  Should it determine that the exhibits of record accurately reflect those the parties intended to proffer and it intended to receive, then the trial court shall so inform this court via pertinent findings.  Should it determine that the exhibits received and included in the reporter’s record differ from those the parties tendered and it intended to accept, then the trial court shall specify, via pertinent findings, which exhibits they may be and attach an accurate copy of them to its findings.  The latter must then be included in a supplemental record, which record must then be filed with the clerk of this court on or before August 15, 2011.  Should further time be needed by the trial court to perform these tasks, then same must be requested before August 15, 2011.

It is so ordered.                                  

Per Curiam

Do not publish.