in the Interest of E.J., J.J., V.J., and C.J.X., Children

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10-16-00417-CV IN THE INTEREST OF E.J., J.J., V.J., AND C.J.X., CHILDREN From the 85th District Court Brazos County, Texas Trial Court No. 15-000408-CV-85 ORDER On March 24, 2017, appellants filed a motion for an extension of time to file their pro se response to their appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw and supporting Anders brief. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967). The basis of the motion is that certain pretrial hearings were apparently not transcribed although they arguably had been designated as part of the record. According to the motion: [Counsel] sent an additional request for these transcriptions by email to Kimberly McCright, President and CEO of Verbatim Reporting and Transcription LLC, on March 17, 2017. She forwarded the request to the trial court judge John Delaney, who initially denied the request on March 19, 2017. Upon being provided with further information about the belief that there is information in the pre-trial transcripts that is relevant to the appeal, Judge Delaney approved the request on March 21, 2017. Counsel is ordered to provide to this Court, within 7 days from the date of this order, the referenced communications with the recorder so that the Court may take appropriate actions to secure the timely transcription and filing of a supplemental record. Because appellants do not have the complete record for their review, their response to counsel’s Anders brief is not yet due. The motion for extension of time to file a response is dismissed without prejudice to file another, if needed, after the supplemental record has been filed. PER CURIAM Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Motion dismissed Order issued and filed April 5, 2017 In the Interest of E.J., J.J., V.J., and C.J.X., Children Page 2