Dylyn Reed Richards v. State ( 2014 )

IN THE
TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
No. 10-13-00412-CR
DYLYN REED RICHARDS,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
From the 40th District Court
Ellis County, Texas
Trial Court No. 37254CR
ORDER
Appellant's brief was originally due on April 21, 2014. On April 23, 2014, the
Court granted appellant's motion for extension of time to file his brief. Appellant’s brief
was due June 20, 2014.
Appellant's second motion for extension of time to file his brief was filed on June
20, 2014. The primary reason for the request for an extension of time was that counsel
for appellant was “a sole practitioner and insufficient uninterrupted time has been
available to produce the Petitioner’s Brief on the Merits.” The Court granted this
second motion on June 25, 2014 and the time to file appellant’s brief was extended to
August 4, 2014.
Appellant's third motion for extension of time to file his brief was filed on
August 4, 2014. An amended motion for extension of time was filed on the same day.1
In his amended motion, appellant has requested an extension of time until September
18, 2014, to file his brief; a total of 180 days to complete what the rules provide as a
standard to be performed in 30 days. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6. In the amended third
motion, it again states that the primary reason for the request for an extension of time is
that counsel is “a sole practitioner who is frequently in court and has not been able to
block off sufficient uninterrupted time to prepare the Appellant’s brief.”
Even when an extension may initially be justified, the Court must draw the limit
at some point. The Court has reached that point in this appeal. See Tyree v. State, 342
S.W.3d 808, 809 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2011, order) ("We no longer want to be told that 'I
am too busy with other stuff to do what you want.'").
Accordingly, appellant’s amended third motion for extension of time to file his
brief is denied. Appellant's brief is ordered to be filed within 21 days from the date of
this order. The failure of the Court to timely receive appellant's brief will result in the
Court abating the appeal and ordering the trial court to conduct a hearing under Rules
of Appellate Procedure 38.8(b)(2) & (3).
PER CURIAM
1Because appellant’s third motion for extension of time was amended, we will only rule on the amended
motion.
Richards v. State Page 2
Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Davis, and
Justice Scoggins
Motion denied
Order issued and filed August 14, 2014
Richards v. State Page 3