Case Information
*1 FILED IN The Court of Appeals Sixth District DEC 092015 Texarkana, Texas Debra Autrey, Clark LARRY JOE Jones Appellant 4 State of Texas Appellee
B5th District Court Brazeps County TEXAS Trial Court Wo 14-2769.
Motion To Distress Counsel Proceed Ro-Se On Direct Appeal To Honorable Judge of Appellee Lount: Come Now Appellant, LARRY JOE Jones, in above Styled and Numbered Cause of action to Show the Count the Following:
I.
The United States Supreme Court has held that there is no constitutional right to represent oneself on appeal. Martinez v. Lourt of Appeal of California, Four Appellate District
*2 S28 U.S. 163, 120 S.Ct. 684,692,145 L.Ed 2d 597 (2000) see Fewins V. State, 170 S.W 3d 293, 295 (Tex. App. - Waco 2005, order) (clarifying that "article" L. section 10 of in Texas Constitution does not conter the right of self-representation afford by the Sixth Amendment under Faretta 'Memphasis is orginal). However, a criminal defendant does have a statutory right to Self-representation on appeal. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. arct. 1, es 1 (d)(1) (West Supp. 2014); see Also SicKles V. State 170 S.W. 3d 298, 299 (Tex. App. - Waco order). But the right to represent oneself on appeal cannot be used as a tactic to delay the disposition of a proceeding or to create an issue when there is none. See Hubbard V. State, 739 S.W. 2d 341, 344 (Tex. Crim App. 1987), Webb V. State 533 S.W. 2d 780 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976); see Also Faretta V. California 422.
*3 U.S. 806, 834 P. 46 95. S. Ct 2525, 2541, 45 L. Ed. 2d 562 (1975) (The right of self-representation is not a license to abuse the dignity of the courtroom. Neither is it a license nor to comply with relevant rules of procedural and substantive law. Thus, whatever else may or may not be open to him on appeal, a defendant who elects to represent himself cannot thereafter complain that the quality of his own defense amounted to a denial of "effective assistance of counsel").
On the other hand, subsection 5 of Article 1.051 of the Texas Code of Criminal Proc. authorizes a criminal defendant to waiver his right to appointed counsel so long as the waiver is made "voluntary and idreligently and in writing". Tex Code Crim Proc. Ann. ant. 1.051 (P). Once the right to self to self-representation is asserted, the trial Judge must inform the defendant about the dangers and disadvantage of self representation so that the record will
*4 establish that he knows what he is doing and his choice is made with open eyes. Id set 1.051/g). If the counter determines the the criminal determinant has voluntarily said intellectually waived his right to counsel the counter shall required him to execute a written wiser of counsel which substantially complies with that 1.051 (3). Id.
Wherefore, Heavises Considered the Appellant proys that Motion T. Disins Counsel on Direct Appest to proceed in se. shinl he granted.
Respect tuiy submitted
Certificate of Service I heopu certify that a ture copy of the above foregone is true aped correct and has sent to counsel of recored and bistic of
*5 No. 06-15-DO124-CR LARRY, Joe JONES 2005311 12/04/2015 Bilunisley UNIT RECEIVED IN The Court of Appeals Statin District 3822 Faw. 350 Livingtan JEXAS 7759601 Six Court of Appeals Debra K. Autrey/ Cleet 100 North State Line Avenue 20 JEXARANA, JEXAS 75581 E.: Motion To Dismiss Counsel To Proced In-See An Direct Appeal Dear Cheek, Please find evolace the above reference to Filed and a marked returned copy Also for the Court ruling on this matibn. Sincerely, Jones. Rary 2005311 C: David Cranford Appellee Attarney Javis Mersous, Brizas Cunty District Attarney