ROY EDWARD CRUZ,FROM A DISTRICT COURT APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT DALLAS
 
NO. 05-88-00516-CR
 
ROY EDWARD CRUZ,FROM A DISTRICT COURT
 
        APPELLANT,
 
v.
 
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
 
        APPELLEE.OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
 
 
BEFORE JUSTICES STEWART, ROWE AND OVARD
OPINION BY JUSTICE JOHN OVARD
APRIL 7, 1989
        Appellant, Roy Edward Cruz, appeals his conviction for burglary of a building. After receiving appellant's plea of guilty, the trial court deferred further proceedings without entering an adjudication of guilt and placed appellant on probation for five years. A plea of true was entered by appellant to the State's motion to proceed with an adjudication of guilt. The trial court revoked appellant's probation, adjudged him guilty, and sentenced him to ten years' confinement. Appellant timely filed and presented a motion for new trial and attached an unsworn declaration. The trial court denied the motion without a hearing. In his fourth point of error, appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial without a hearing. We agree. In McMillan v. State, No. 05-88-00536-CR (Tex. App.--Dallas, March 31, 1989, n.p.h.) (not yet reported), we addressed issues presented in the present case. In McMillan, slip op. at 6, we sustained a point of error that the trial court erred in denying a motion for a new trial without a hearing. We conclude that our opinion in McMillan controls disposition of the present appeal. We sustain appellant's fourth point of error and remand this cause to the trial court for further proceedings.
        Appellant further requests that this Court determine the status of his counsel on appeal. We decline to do so, and express no opinion as to whether his counsel is appointed to represent appellant on appeal. We do, however, grant appellant's motion for leave to file appellant's brief on appeal.
        We set aside the notice of appeal and the trial court's order denying appellant's motion for a new trial. We order the trial court to conduct a hearing on the motion for a new trial. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 2(b), we suspend the requirements of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, insofar as they impose time limits computed from the date sentence was imposed or suspended. In lieu of these computations, time limits shall be computed from the date of this Court's judgment in this cause. See McMillan, slip op. at 7-8.
                                                  
                                                  JOHN OVARD
                                                  JUSTICE
 
DO NOT PUBLISH
TEX. R. APP. P. 90
88-00516.F
 
 
File Date[01-02-89]
File Name[880516]