ROBERT FRIESENHAHN v. THE STATE OF TEXAS--Appeal from County Court at Law of Aransas County

NUMBER 13-04-528-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_ ___ _ __________________________________________

ROBERT FRIESENHAN, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

_________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law

of Aransas County, Texas.

_________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Hinojosa and Garza

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Robert Friesenhan was convicted of theft. Represented by appointed counsel, appellant filed a notice of appeal on October 7, 2004. The clerk=s record was filed on October 26, 2004. That same day, the trial court allowed appellant=s court-appointed counsel to withdraw. A supplemental clerk=s record was filed on November 30, 2004. On January 20, 2005, this Court abated the appeal and remanded the cause to the trial court to determine whether appellant wished to prosecute his appeal and whether appellant was indigent. We requested that the trial court make appropriate findings and recommendations and prepare a record of the proceedings. If appellant were to be found indigent, we directed the trial court to take such measures as necessary to assure effective representation of counsel, which could include the appointment of new counsel. We have now received the trial court=s findings and recommendations.

Despite being duly noticed, appellant failed to appear at the hearing on remand. The trial court noted that appellant had also failed to appear at the prior hearing wherein appellant=s appointed counsel was allowed to withdraw, in part, on grounds that he was having difficulty communicating with appellant. According to the record, the trial court sent all notices and correspondence to appellant=s last known address, which was the same address as that provided on appellant=s bail bond and affidavit of indigence, and, incidentally, the same address provided to this Court. The trial court concluded that, given appellant=s failure to appear, it was unable to determine whether appellant desired to prosecute his appeal or whether appellant was indigent. According to the trial court, appellant=s whereabouts are unknown.

On April 13, 2005, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant at his last known address that the reporter=s record was originally due on January 15, 2005, but had not filed because it had not been properly requested. In accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 37.3(c), the Clerk notified appellant that, if the defect were not cured within ten days, the Court would consider and decide those issues or points that did not require a reporter=s record for decision. To date, appellant has failed to request or file the reporter=s record.

It has now been over a year since the clerk=s record was filed. Appellant has failed to provide this Court with his current address or location, has failed to contact this Court, and has failed in his duty to prosecute this appeal. Appellant has been given a reasonable opportunity to obtain representation on appeal and to obtain the reporter=s record. We conclude that the absence of the reporter=s record is appellant=s fault. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c). We also find that appellant has not made the necessary arrangements for filing a brief. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(b)(4).

Based on the foregoing sequence of events, we have examined the clerk=s record and find no error that should be considered in the interests of justice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this the 26th day of January, 2006.