Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906 (Tex. App. 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906 (Tex. App. 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
258 citation events (251 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Jerris Harris v. the State of Texas (texapp, 2025-05-28) · Strongest negative: Stephens v. State (texapp, 2000-12-21)
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
cited Cited "but see" Stephens v. State
Tex. App. · 2000 · signal: but see · confidence high
But see Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex.App. — Waco 1999, order); Bonner v. State, 29 S.W.3d 360, 360-61 (Tex.App. — Waco 2000), (order).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jerris Harris v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
See Alvarado v. State, 562 S.W.3d 450 , 450–51 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet.); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Scales v. State, No. 03-23-00493-CR, 2024 WL 3841740 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Aug. 15, 2024) (order and mem. op.) (not designated for publication).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) The State of Texas v. Manuel Gutierrez Torres
Tex. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
See Alvarado v. State, 562 S.W.3d 450 , 450–51 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet.); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Williamson v. State, No. 03-12-00672-CR, 2013 WL 363677 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Paul Daniel Zipper v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
See Alvarado v. State, 562 S.W.3d 450 , 450–51 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet.); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Williamson v. State, No. 03-12-00672-CR, 2013 WL 363677 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Brandy Dawn Todd v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
See Alvarado v. State, 562 S.W.3d 450 , 450–51 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, no pet.); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Williamson v. State, No. 03-12-00672-CR, 2013 WL 363677 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Wanda Faye Rougeau v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
ANN. arts. 1.051(d), 26.04(j)(2) (West Supp. 2020); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order).
cited Cited as authority (rule) William Frederick Petty, III v. State
Tex. App. · 2019 · confidence medium
ANN. art. 26.04 (West 2009); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Cynthia Staley v. State
Tex. App. · 2018 · confidence medium
ANN. art. 26.04(a) (West Supp. 2017); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order) (per curiam); cf. Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 688 (Tex. Crim.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Adrian Valadez v. State
Tex. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
ANN. art. 26.04(j)(2) (West 2009); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Waymon Leon Webster v. State
Tex. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
ANN. art 26.04(j)(2) (West 2009); Ibarra v. State, 226 S.W.3d 481, 483 (Tex. App.—Waco 2006, no pet.) (Anders is an exception to rule announced in Enriquez); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order) (construing predecessor to current statute; see Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch 979 § 2, amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch 906, § 6) (only trial court has authority to grant appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Dylyn Reed Richards v. State
Tex. App. · 2014 · confidence medium
ANN. art 26.04(j)(2) (West 2009); Noland v. State, 261 S.W.3d 926 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008, order); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order) (construing predecessor to current statute; see Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch 979 § 2, amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch 906, § 6).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Richard Carroll Segrest v. State
Tex. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
ANN. art 26.04(j)(2) (West Supp. 2013); Noland v. State, 261 S.W.3d 926 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008, order); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order) (construing predecessor to current statute; see Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch 979 § 2, amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch 906, § 6).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ealon Charles Scott v. State
Tex. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
ANN. art 26.04(j)(2) (West Supp. 2012); Noland v. State, 261 S.W.3d 926 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008, order); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order) (construing predecessor to current statute; see Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch 979 § 2, amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch 906, § 6).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kodigbo Odelugo v. State
Tex. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
App. 1995); Bonner, 29 S.W.3d at 361 ; Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Roberts v. State, 705 S.W.2d 803, 805 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1986, no pet.).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Korey Adeleye v. State
Tex. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
App. 2006) (citing with approval Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex. App.--Waco 1999, order)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Korey Adeleye v. State
Tex. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
App. 2006) (citing with approval Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex. App.---Waco 1999, order)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Korey Adeleye v. State
Tex. App. · 2012 · confidence medium
App. 2006) (citing with approval Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex. App.---Waco 1999, order)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Michael Anthony Pena v. State
Tex. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
Ann. arts. 1.051(d), 26.04 (West Supp. 2011); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex.App.--Waco 1999, no pet.).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Michael Anthony Pena v. State
Tex. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
ANN. arts. 1.051(d), 26.04 (West Supp. 2011); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex.App.--Waco 1999, no pet.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cesar Dan Hernandez-Sandoval v. State
Tex. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
When faced with a motion requesting that original court-appointed attorney be allowed to withdraw and that another attorney be substituted to pursue the appeal, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has stated that "it is fitting that a case should be abated to the trial court for substitution of counsel," "[e]specially given the elaborate mechanism for making court appointments for indigent criminal defendants that is now in place under Article 26.04." Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 688 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006) (citing with approval Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex.App. -- Waco 1999, ord…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cesar Dan Hernandez-Sandoval v. State
Tex. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
When faced with a motion requesting that original court-appointed attorney be allowed to withdraw and that another attorney be substituted to pursue the appeal, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has stated that “it is fitting that a case should be abated to the trial court for substitution of counsel,” “[e]specially given the elaborate mechanism for making court appointments for indigent criminal defendants that is now in place under Article 26.04.” Meza v. State, 206 S.W.3d 684, 688 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006) (citing with approval Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex.App.—Waco 19…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Jason Christopher Weeks v. State
Tex. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
App. 2006); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex. App.–Waco 1999, no pet.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re M.V.G. (2×) also: Cited "see"
Tex. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, order, no pet.) (per curiam) (citing Tex. R.
examined Cited as authority (rule) in the Interest of M.V.G., a Child (3×) also: Cited "see"
Tex. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
Enriquez v. State , 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order, no pet.) (per curiam) (citing Tex. R.
examined Cited as authority (rule) In Re MVG (3×) also: Cited "see"
Tex. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, order, no pet.) (per curiam) (citing TEX.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Noland v. State
Tex. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
Ann. art 26.040(2) (Vernon Supp.2007); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, order) (construing predecessor to current statute; see Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 979 § 2, amended by Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 906, § 6).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Ibarra v. State
Tex. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Id. at 692 ; Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, no pet.).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Meza v. State
Tex. Crim. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
This rule expressly and generally authorizes an appellate court to "permit an attorney to withdraw from representing a party in the appellate court." The court of appeals in Enriquez recognized Rule 6.5, but nevertheless ruled that any withdrawal and substitution of court-appointed counsel for an indigent defendant in a criminal appeal must be made at the trial court level, under Article 26.04(a), before such a withdrawal and substitution is "bound” to be "acknowledged” by the appellate court under Rule 6.5(d). 999 S.W.2d at 907, 908 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Meza, Pedro Jose
Tex. Crim. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
This rule expressly and generally authorizes an appellate court to "permit an attorney to withdraw from representing a party in the appellate court." The court of appeals in Enriquez recognized Rule 6.5, but nevertheless ruled that any withdrawal and substitution of court-appointed counsel for an indigent defendant in a criminal appeal must be made at the trial court level, under Article 26.04(a), before such a withdrawal and substitution is "bound" to be "acknowledged" by the appellate court under Rule 6.5(d). 999 S.W.2d at 907, 908 .
cited Cited as authority (rule) Pippillion v. State
Tex. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
As an exception to this Court’s order in Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, order), this Court may grant a motion to withdraw when appointed counsel files an Anders brief.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Donald Wayne Dorch v. State
Tex. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
S ee also Enriquez v. State , 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex.App.--Waco 1999, no pet.).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Sossamon v. State
Tex. App. · 2002 · confidence medium
Ann. art. 26.04(j)(2) (Vernon Supp.2003)); 5 Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, order, no pet.) (per curiam).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Walker v. State
Tex. App. · 2002 · confidence medium
Ann. art. 26.04(j)(2) (Vernon Supp.2002)); Sowels v. State, 45 S.W.3d 690, 692 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001, no pet.) (citing Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, order, no pet.)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Phillip Parker v. State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2002 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
P. 6.5; cf. Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex.App.-Waco 1999, no pet.) (only trial court can permit appointed counsel to withdraw).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Page v. State
Tex. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
Sowels, 45 S.W.3d at 692 -93 (citing Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex.App.—Waco 1999, order, no pet.)).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Guerrero v. State (4×) also: Cited "see"
Tex. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 908 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order, no pet.).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Sowels v. State
Tex. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
Ann. art. 26.04(a) (Vernon 1989); Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex.App. — Waco 1999, order).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Bonner v. State (2×)
Tex. App. · 2000 · confidence medium
Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex.App.— Waco 1999, order).
discussed Cited "see" Frank Alton Martinez v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Williamson v. State, No. 13–12–00672–CR, 2013 WL 363677 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
discussed Cited "see" Jarrod Anthonie Scales v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Vargas v. State, No. 03-16-00083- CR, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 6863 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin June 30, 2016, order) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
discussed Cited "see" Chineme Reginald Ogbuehi v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Vercher v. State No. 03-13-00799-CR, 2014 WL 2573747 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin June 5, 2014, no pet.) (mem. op. & order, not designated for publication); see also Burnett v. State, 959 S.W.2d 652, 655 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1997, pet. ref’d) (noting that appointed counsel has legal duty to represent defendant until officially relieved of obligation by court or appeal is exhausted); Bell v. State, 723 S.W.2d 317, 317 (Tex. App.—Austin 1987, order) (explaining that “[t]his Court will not allow appointe…
discussed Cited "see" Kevin Edward Martin v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Williamson v. State, No. 13–12–00672–CR, 2013 WL 363677 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
discussed Cited "see" Ruben Alonzo v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Williamson v. State, No. 13–12–00672–CR, 2013 WL 363677 , at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
discussed Cited "see" Ron Guzman v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2023 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, no pet.); Williamson v. State, No. 03–12–00672–CR, 2013 WL 363677 at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin Jan. 25, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).
cited Cited "see" Xavier Rashad Lee v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906 , 907–08 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order) (per curiam); TEX.
cited Cited "see" Jetmir Nokshiqi v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906 , 907–08 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order) (per curiam); TEX.
cited Cited "see" Xavier Rashad Lee v. the State of Texas
Tex. App. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906 , 907–08 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order) (per curiam); TEX.
discussed Cited "see" Kristen Eileen Brown v. the State of Texas (2×)
Tex. App. · 2021 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order); TEX.
cited Cited "see" Ex Parte Carlton Eugene Brantner
Tex. App. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, order); TEX.
cited Cited "see" Omar Calderon v. State
Tex. App. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Enriquez v. State, 999 S.W.2d 906, 907-08 (Tex. App. – Waco 1999, no pet.); see also Meza, 206 S.W.3d at 686 .
Jose Silvino ENRIQUEZ, Appellant,
v.
the STATE of Texas, Appellee
10-99-155-CR.
Court of Appeals of Texas.
Sep 1, 1999.
999 S.W.2d 906
Ricardo De Los Santos, Cleburne, for appellant., Dale S. Hanna, Johnson County Dist,. Atty., Cleburne, for appellee.
Davis, Vance, Gray.
Cited by 182 opinions  |  Published

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Jose Silvino Enriquez was convicted on three counts of aggravated sexual assault. The trial judge found the use of a deadly weapon in the commission of those offenses. Enriquez filed a notice of appeal and motion for new trial on May 18, 1999, through his trial attorney, Ricardo De Los Santos. Another motion for new trial was filed on behalf of Enriquez on May 21,1999, by another attorney, Wes Dauphinot.

On August 5, 1999, we received a Notice of Substitution of Counsel and Designation of Lead Counsel. The trial court’s docket sheet reveals that De Los Santos represented Enriquez during his trial and was appointed to represent Enriquez for his appeal. According to the notice of substitution, Enriquez now wants De Los Santos to withdraw as counsel and wants Francisco Hernandez and Wes Dauphinot to pursue his appeal. The notice was signed by Dauphinot, Hernandez and De Los Santos.

We construe this notice as a motion to withdraw and substitute as counsel. See Tex.R.App.P. 6.5. We deny the motion.

It is clear that the legislature has given the trial court the responsibility for counsel appointed to represent indigent defendants in criminal proceedings. Tex. Code CRIM.PROC.Ann. art. 26.04(a) (Vernon 1989). Equally clear is the authority of the trial court to relieve appointed counsel of his duties or replace him with other counsel. Id. The text of the statute is as follows:

(a) Whenever the court determines that a defendant charged with a felony or a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment is indigent or that the interests of justice require representation of a defendant in a criminal proceeding, the court shall appoint one or more practicing attorneys to defend him. An attorney appointed under this subsection shall represent the defendant until charges are dismissed, the defendant is acquitted, appeals are exhausted, or the attorney is relieved of his duties by the court or replaced by other counsel.

[*908] Id. There is no limitation on the time frame during which the trial court has authority to make the appointment or substitution of counsel. Thus, article 26.04(a) provides a statutory exception to appellate rule 25.2(e) which provides that the trial court normally loses jurisdiction over a pending matter when the appellate record has been filed, as it has been in this case. Tex.R.App.P. 25.2(e). The only limitation is that the change in counsel not prejudice the rights of the defendant. See Stearnes v. Clinton, 780 S.W.2d 216 (Tex.Crim.App. 1989) (where the trial court removed appointed counsel because he was uncooperative with and antagonistic toward the State, mandamus was granted); see also In re Behee, 987 S.W.2d 903 (Tex.App.— Waco 1999, orig. proceeding) (where trial court removed appointed counsel because the defendant posted bond, mandamus was conditionally granted).

Payments made to appointed attorneys are paid from the general fund of the county where the prosecution was initiated. Tex.Code CRIm.PROc.Ann. art. 26.05(d) (Vernon 1989). Johnson county is responsible for paying for an attorney to represent Enriquez if he is indigent.

If Enriquez is indigent, the trial court has the authority through the Code of Criminal Procedure to relieve De Los Santos of his duties and appoint new counsel for Enriquez’ appeal. Any substitution of appointed counsel and the related costs to the county should be determined by the trial court that appointed De Los Santos to Enriquez’ criminal proceeding. If Enri-quez wants to retain new appellate counsel, the trial court has the authority to replace the appointed counsel.

We, therefore, deny the motion to withdraw and substitute counsel and recognize only De Los Santos as the attorney representing Enriquez on appeal. If the trial court subsequently approves a substitution of counsel in this case, Enriquez is ordered to supplement the appellate record with the appropriate documentation of such substitution. If the substitution is done in the proper form, the proper motion is then made under Rule 6.5(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, and it is not challenged by Enriquez, we are bound to acknowledge the substitution ordered by the trial court.

The Clerk’s Record was filed with this Court on June 21, 1999. The Reporter’s Record was filed on August 20, 1999. The ordinary timetable for fifing briefs has not been altered.