Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam, 07-25-00278-CR, January 28, 2026.
On appeal from Unknown
Synopsis
When a court reporter fails to timely file the appellate record and ignores status inquiries from the clerk, the appellate court must exercise its authority under TRAP 35.3(c) to protect the integrity of the appeal. By abating the proceedings and remanding the cause, the court shifts the burden to the trial court to investigate the delinquency and, if necessary, appoint a substitute reporter to ensure the record is completed without further delay.
Relevance to Family Law
In family law litigation, particularly in high-stakes custody disputes or complex property divisions, time is rarely a neutral factor. A stalled appeal often leaves families in a state of precarious limbo—potentially trapped under restrictive temporary orders or facing the continued enforcement of a decree that the appellant contends is erroneous. Because the reporter’s record is the lifeline of any evidentiary challenge, a delinquent reporter can effectively “pocket-veto” an appeal. This ruling underscores the appellate court’s willingness to bypass the reporter’s silence and force a resolution, providing family law practitioners with a procedural roadmap to break the logjam and move toward a final appellate determination.
Case Summary
Fact Summary
The Appellant, Jacob Aaron Vera, sought to appeal consecutive forty-year sentences for aggravated sexual assault of a child following a judgment in the 100th District Court of Hall County. The appellate record was originally due on December 23, 2025; however, that deadline passed without the filing of the reporter’s record. On December 30, 2025, the Court of Appeals notified the official court reporter of the delinquency and provided a deadline of January 9, 2026, to provide a status update or file the record. The court reporter failed to respond to the inquiry and failed to file the record, leaving the appeal in a procedural standstill with no communication regarding the cause of the delay or the anticipated completion date.
Issues Decided
The court addressed whether the appellate court must abate an appeal and remand to the trial court for an evidentiary inquiry when a court reporter fails to perform their duties and remains unresponsive to the appellate court’s directives.
Rules Applied
The Court applied Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 35.3(c), which dictates that the trial and appellate courts share a “joint responsibility” for ensuring the timely filing of the appellate record. Additionally, the Court utilized TRAP 37.3(a)(2), which empowers appellate courts to “make whatever order is appropriate” to prevent further delay and preserve the rights of the parties when the record is not timely filed due to the reporter’s (or clerk’s) failure.
Application
The Court navigated the procedural failure by refusing to allow the reporter’s silence to further prejudice the Appellant’s rights. Instead of granting indefinite informal extensions, the Court invoked the joint responsibility doctrine. By abating the appeal, the Court effectively transferred the investigative burden to the trial judge, who maintains direct administrative oversight of the court reporter. The Court’s narrative approach focuses on a four-part inquiry the trial court must now conduct: identifying remaining tasks, determining the cause of the reporter’s failure, establishing a reasonable timeline for completion, and assessing the reporter’s actual capacity to meet that timeline. This systematic application of the rules ensures that the “joint responsibility” of the judiciary is not merely theoretical but is backed by the threat of replacing the reporter if they cannot comply within a thirty-day window.
Holding
The Court held that the appropriate remedy for a delinquent and unresponsive court reporter is the immediate abatement of the appeal and remand to the trial court for a formal investigation. The Court ordered the trial court to enter specific findings regarding the reporter’s progress and motives, emphasizing that the judiciary must take an active role in record management rather than remaining passive.
Furthermore, the Court held that if the trial court determines the current reporter cannot complete the record within thirty days, the trial court is mandated to arrange for a substitute reporter. This holding ensures that the appellate process cannot be held hostage by the administrative failures of a single court official, providing a clear “kill switch” for delays that exceed a reasonable duration.
Practical Application
For the family law practitioner, this case provides a strategic tool when dealing with overextended court reporters in rural or high-volume districts. If a reporter is non-responsive to your inquiries regarding a transcript for a long-duration final hearing, you should not wait for the appellate court to act sua sponte. Instead, practitioners should consider filing a motion to abate under TRAP 35.3(c) as soon as the initial grace period expires. This forces the trial judge—who is often the reporter’s direct supervisor—to take a formal stand on the record’s status. In custody cases where a child’s placement is at stake, this “forced filing” mechanism is essential to prevent the “de facto” affirmance of a trial court’s ruling through sheer delay.
Checklists
Managing the Delinquent Record
- Monitor the Clerk’s Notices: Ensure you are tracking the “Record Due” date on the appellate portal.
- The “Ten-Day” Inquiry: If the record is not filed by the deadline, send a formal (but professional) inquiry to the reporter and the appellate clerk within 10 days.
- Invoke 35.3(c) via Motion: If the reporter remains silent after an appellate court warning, file a “Motion to Abate for Record Completion” citing Vera and Rule 35.3(c).
- Demand the “Thirty-Day” Trigger: In your proposed order, include a provision that if the reporter cannot finish in 30 days, the trial court must appoint a substitute, as the Amarillo court did here.
Trial Court Remand Hearing Prep
- Request Findings of Fact: If the case is remanded, ensure the trial court makes the four specific findings listed in the Vera opinion.
- Subpoena the Reporter’s Notes: If there is a question of the reporter’s capacity, ensure the trial court secures the stenographic notes or digital audio files to facilitate a substitute’s work.
- Establish the “Reasonable Time”: Be prepared to argue why the “reasonably necessary” time for completion should be measured in days, not months, especially in SAPCR (Suit Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship) matters.
Citation
Jacob Aaron Vera v. The State of Texas, Nos. 07-25-00278-CR & 07-25-00281-CR (Tex. App.—Amarillo Jan. 28, 2026, order) (per curiam).
Full Opinion
Family Law Crossover
In Texas family law, the trial court’s “gatekeeper” function often extends to the court reporter. In some jurisdictions, reporters are so overwhelmed with the trial judge’s daily docket that appellate transcripts for “old” cases fall to the bottom of the pile. This ruling can be weaponized by an appellant to bypass the trial court’s potential leniency toward its own staff. By invoking Vera and TRAP 35.3(c), you are reminding the appellate court that the trial judge has a legal duty to manage their reporter. If the trial judge is reluctant to discipline a favored reporter, this procedure forces the issue into a supplemental clerk’s record, creating a paper trail of administrative failure that can be used to justify further relief—including potential mandamus or a finding that the delay has prejudiced the party’s due process rights in a custody or parental termination context.
~~32a04ceb-3dca-44cf-8ed7-1ee4d5f94c8d~~
Share this content: