Jamaal Clarence Staten v. The State of Texas--Appeal from Criminal District Court of Jefferson County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
_________________
NO. 09-09-00491-CR
_________________
JAMAAL CLARENCE STATEN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
_____________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the Criminal District Court
Jefferson County, Texas
Trial Cause No. 08-04173
_____________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury convicted Jamaal Clarence Staten of aggravated assault and then assessed a
seven year sentence. Staten voluntarily absented himself from the courtroom throughout
the trial. The trial court proceeded to pronounce Staten’s sentence although he was not
present.
In a separate opinion, issued on the same day as this opinion, we addressed
whether we had jurisdiction to consider Staten’s appeal from the trial court’s revocation
of his community supervision for possession of marijuana. See Staten v. State, No. 09-0900490-CR (Tex. App.–Beaumont July 7, 2010). We decided to abate that appeal and
remand the cause to the trial court to allow the trial court to orally pronounce Staten’s
1
sentence in his presence because sentencing a defendant in his presence is required to
vest our court with jurisdiction over his appeal. Id.; see Casias v. State, 503 S.W.2d 262,
265 (Tex. Crim. App. 1973); Meachum v. State, 273 S.W.3d 803, 805-06 (Tex. App.–
Houston [14th Dist.] 2008, no pet.); see also TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.03 §
1(a) (Vernon Supp. 2009). Therefore, for the same reasons we abated the appeal in
appellate cause number 09-09-00490-CR, we abate this appeal.1
We abate Staten’s appeal and remand Cause Number 09-09-00491-CR to the trial
court. Upon remand, the trial court shall cause notice of a hearing to be given and
thereafter, pronounce Staten’s sentence in his presence. A court reporter’s record of the
sentencing shall be prepared and filed in the record of this appeal, together with a
supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s judgment. The appeal will be
reinstated when the supplemental records are filed. Upon reinstatement, this Court will
consider the merits of the issues raised in Staten’s brief.
APPEAL ABATED AND CAUSE REMANDED.
________________________________
HOLLIS HORTON
Justice
Submitted on June 16, 2010
Opinion Delivered July 7, 2010
Do Not Publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
1
Because jurisdiction is fundamental, we may sua sponte address the issue. See
State v. Roberts, 940 S.W.2d 655, 657 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996), overruled on other
grounds by State v. Medrano, 67 S.W.3d 892, 894 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002).
2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
