Karen Roberts v. State

In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana ______________________________ No. 06-09-00003-CR ______________________________ KAREN ROBERTS, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 76th Judicial District Court Titus County, Texas Trial Court No. CR 14443 Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley MEMORANDUM OPINION Karen Roberts appeals from her conviction of indecency with a child. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 21.11(a)(1) (Vernon 2003). She was sentenced to ten years' confinement and a fine of $10,000.00. Roberts is not indigent. Roberts filed her notice of appeal November 7, 2008. The clerk's record was filed February 13, 2009, and the reporter's record was due December 19, 2008, and has not been filed. Roberts's retained attorney filed a motion to withdraw, stating that he had been entirely unable to convince Roberts to cooperate, communicate, stay in contact with him, or sign the certification of right to appeal. Counsel further detailed in his motion the difficulties he encountered in attempting to contact Roberts, or to obtain direction from her concerning the continuation or termination of her appeal. Counsel mailed a copy of that motion to Roberts, and also met all the requirements of Rule 6.5 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See Tex. R. App. P. 6.5. On February 24, 2009, this Court granted counsel's motion to withdraw. On that same date, this Court also mailed a letter to the last known address Roberts had provided to counsel providing Roberts with ten days in which to retain different counsel to pursue the appeal or to take other action showing her continuing intention to effectively pursue this appeal, and informed Roberts that if she had not contacted this Court within ten days of the date of our letter with such information, the appeal would be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution. Roberts has not contacted this Court. The reporter's record is now over three months past due, and she has not contacted the reporter to make arrangements to pay for the record. She has not filed a brief based on the clerk's record alone. She has not retained different counsel to represent her on appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. See Stavinoha v. State, 82 S.W.3d 690, 691 (Tex. App.--Waco 2002, no pet.); Bush v. State, 80 S.W.3d 199, 200 (Tex. App.--Waco 2002, no pet.); see also McDaniel v. State, 75 S.W.3d 605, 605-06 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2002, no pet.); Rodriguez v. State, 970 S.W.2d 133, 135 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 1998, pet. ref'd). Bailey C. Moseley Justice Date Submitted: April 9, 2009 Date Decided: April 10, 2009 Do Not Publish 0; Justice Date Submitted: April 10, 2006 Date Decided: June 6, 2006 Do Not Publish