Christopher Michael Langley v. State ( 2003 )

Opinion issued October 30, 2003  

  In The  

Court of Appeals  

For The  

First District of Texas  

____________

NO. 01-03-00390-CR

____________

CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL LANGLEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

---

On Appeal from the 21st District Court

Washington County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 13,538

---

MEMORANDUM OPINION

               Appellant, Christopher Michael Langley, was convicted of theft of more than $1500 but less than $20,000, and placed on community supervision for five years. Appellant’s trial counsel filed a notice of appeal.

               On August 21, 2003, we abated the appeal and remanded the case to the trial court for a hearing because neither the record nor briefs had been filed, and no attorney had entered an appearance in this Court on appellant’s behalf. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b). The case was set for a hearing in the trial court on September 30, 2003 at 9:00 a.m. The trial court notified this Court by letter that appellant did not appear. The trial judge also stated in his letter that the court coordinator had notified appellant of the setting by letter mailed to his last known address, and that the letter had not been returned by the postal service.

               According to the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we may consider an appeal without briefs if the trial court has found that the appellant no longer desires to prosecute the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4). The trial court did not make such a finding in this case. However, we find that because appellant has done nothing to prosecute the appeal and has not kept the trial court informed of his whereabouts, appellant no longer desires to prosecute the appeal. We further find that good cause exists to suspend the requirement of Rule 38.8(b)(4) that the finding be made by the trial court. See Tex. R. App. P. 2.

               Accordingly, we consider this appeal without briefs, and there is no record to review for fundamental error. Cf. Carroll v. State, 75 S.W.3d 633, 634 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002, no pet.); Ashcraft v. State, 802 S.W.2d 905, 906 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1991, no pet.); Meza v. State, 742 S.W.2d 708, 708-09 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.).  

               We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack, and Justices Keyes and Alcala.

Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.2.(b).