Tyler Ford Vanterpool v. State ( 2013 )

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 14, 2013. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-13-00757-CR TYLER FORD VANTERPOOL, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court Colorado County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 23,121 MEMORANDUM OPINION After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of the misdemeanor offense of possession of less than two grams of marihuana. On July 18, 2013, the trial court sentenced to appellant to confinement for ten days in the Colorado County Jail, probated for one year, and assessed a $1,500 fine. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal, and the trial court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw from representing appellant. Appellant filed a declaration of Financial Inability to Employ Counsel in the trial court, but our records do not reflect that new counsel was appointed to represent appellant on appeal. In addition, the court reporters who reported the trial notified this court that appellant had not requested preparation of the record and he had not been determined to be indigent. Therefore, on October 10, 2013, this court abated the appeal and directed the trial court to determine whether appellant desires to prosecute his appeal, and if so, whether he is entitled to appointed counsel and a preparation of the record without cost. The trial court conducted the hearing on October 31, 2013. A supplemental clerk’s record containing the record of the hearing was filed in this court on November 6, 2013. The supplemental record contains appellant’s pro se motion to withdraw his notice of appeal, which was personally signed by appellant and filed with the trial court clerk. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Based on this motion, the trial court found that appellant no longer wishes to prosecute his appeal. Rule 42.2 states that in a criminal case, an appellant’s motion to withdraw his notice of appeal is to be filed with the appellate court clerk. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. To expedite our decision, we will consider appellant’s pro se motion to withdraw his notice of appeal filed in the court below. See Tex. R. App. P. 2 (permitting the court of appeals to suspend a rule’s operation and order a different procedure to expedite a decision or for other good cause). Accordingly, we order the appeal reinstated, grant appellant’s request to withdraw the notice of appeal, and order the appeal dismissed. We direct the clerk of the court to issue the mandate of the court immediately. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Christopher, Donovan, and Brown. Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b). 2