Amin Devon Jones v. State

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 8, 2007

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 8, 2007.

 

In The

 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

 

NO. 14-06-00660-CR

____________

 

AMIN DEVON JONES, Appellant

 

V.

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

 

 

On Appeal from the 176th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 828591

 

 

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to deadly conduct in exchange for deferred adjudication.  On July 5, 2006, guilt was adjudicated and the trial court sentenced appellant to confinement for six years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and a fine of $5,000.  Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal on July 17, 2006. 


On October 5, 2006, this court ordered a hearing to determine whether appellant desired to prosecute his appeal.  On January 22, 2007, the trial court conducted the hearing, and the record of the hearing was filed in this court on January 24, 2007.  A supplemental clerk=s record containing the trial court=s findings of fact and conclusions of law was filed on January 23, 2007.

At the hearing, neither appellant nor his counsel appeared.  The trial court found, in pertinent part:

$                   On August 25, 2006, the Harris County Sheriff released the defendant from the Harris County Jail because he had completed serving his sentence in the jail;

$                   The last known address for the defendant is one in Orlando, Florida which the defendant gave as his address in May 2006.  The Court has been unable to locate the defendant since his release from jail in August 2006;

$                   Based upon the foregoing, the Court FINDS the defendant no longer desires to prosecute his appeal.

On the record, the trial court noted that there has been no correspondence from appellant to the court.  The trial court concluded as a matter of law that the defendant does not desire to prosecute his appeal.  Based upon the trial court=s findings of fact and conclusions of law, we conclude that good cause exists to suspend the operation of Rule 42.2(a) in this case.  See Tex. R. App. P. 2.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

 

Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed February 8, 2007.

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Seymore, and Guzman.

Do Not Publish C Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).