## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS OF TE XAS
N O . A P - 76, 320

JA V I E R R . F R A N C O , R el at or

v. D A LL A S D I STR I C T C LE R K , R e s ponde nt

ON P ET I TI ON F OR A W RI T OF M ANDAMUS C A U S E N O S . W 0 6 -49 2 7 1 -T (A ); W 0 5 -45 7 1 8 -T (A ); W 0 5 -45 7 1 3 -T (A )

I N T HE 2 8 3 r d J UDI CI AL DI S TR I CT COURT

FROM DALLAS CO UNTY P er cur i am . OP I NI ON

Re lator fi le d a mot ion fo r l e ave to f

ile a pe tit ion fo r a wr it o f m andamu s pu rsu ant t o th is Court’s orig inal jurisdiction. I n it, he contends that he filed 11.07 applications for wr its of habea s corpus in the c onvicting c ourt on September 2008. H e al l ege s t h at the orde rs desig nating issues signe d on Dec ember

15, 2008 wer e untimely

and asks this Court t o order the district cler

k to forwa rd his 11.07 applications.Fr anco - - 2

On J uly 29, 2009, this Court held Relator’s moti on for lea ve to file in abe y ance and orde red the dis tr ic t cle rk

to r e sp on d w iththe date the State wa s se rv e d w iththe wr it a pp lic a tio n. I n r e sp on se to this C ourt’s orde r, th e d i s trict cler k forwa rded c opies of orde rs desig nating issues which we re signe d on Dec ember 15, 2008 with a statement that the District Attorney ’s office re ce i v ed t he applications on September 19, 2008. This Court has st ill not rec eived these 11.07 applications for

wr its of ha be a s c or pu s and no w c on dit ion a lly

g ra nts thi s mo tio n f

or le ave to f

ile a pe tit ion fo r a wr it of mandamus beca

use the orde rs desig nating issues were untimely

. Upon re ceipt of a

n application for

a wr it of habea s corpus c halleng ing a final fe lony conviction, t he attorney repr esenting the S tate has 15 day s to respond. T EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . art
. 11 .0 7 § (b ). After

the e xpir a tio n o f t

he tim e a llo we d f

or the State to r e sp on d, the tr ia l c ourt is all o wed 20 da

y s to determine whe ther the a pplication contains alleg ations of controve rted, previously

unresolved f

acts mate rial t o the l eg ality of the a pplicant’s conf

inement. T EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . ar t . 11.07 §3(c) . I f the trial c ourt deter mines that the application for writ of ha beas c orpus prese nts such issues it “shall enter a n order within 20 day s of the expiration of the time allowed f or the state to re ply , desig nating issues of fact t o be re solved.” Id. Article 11.07 doe s not authorize the t r i a l c o u rtt o e x t e n d t h e t i m e l i m i t a t i o n s i mp o s e d b y t h e s t a tu t e , o t h e r

t h anb y a timely

issuance of an orde r desig nating issues. M c Cr e e v . H

a m p ton , 824 S.W .2d 578, 579 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). Wit hout a timely

entry of an order desig nating issues, Article 11.07 imposes a duty upon the cler

k of the trial court to immediate ly transmit to this Court the rec ord from the application for a writ of habea s corpus, de emi n g t h e t ri al cour t’s inaction a f

inding that no issues of f act r equire further resolution. T EX . C ODE C R IM . P R OC . art. 11.07, §3(c ). I n this case, Relator filed the a pplications for wr its of habea s corpus in t he trial c ourt onFr anco - - 3

S e p t e mb e r

1 9 , 2 0 0 8

. T h e d i s t r i c ta t t o r n e y’ s o f f i c e w a s s e r

v e d t h e w r i ta p p l i c a t i o n s o nt h e s am e d ay. Th e tr ia l c ourt

sig ne d o rd e rs de sig natin g i ss ues on De c e mbe r 1 5, 20 08 , w hic h w a s a ft e r t he tim e limit ations provided in t h e statute had e x pired. This untimely order interfe red w ith the district

c le rk ’s duty to tr ans mit the a pp lic a tio ns to thi s Cour

t and is the re fo re wi tho ut e ff e c t. See M

artin v. Ha ml in , 2 5 S. W.3 d 7 18 , ( Te x. Cr im. Ap p. 20 00 ). Th e dis tr ic t c le rk ha s n o a uth or ity to c on tin ue to ho ld Re lator ’s a

pp lic a tio ns fo r wr its of ha be a s cor pu s and is u nd e r a min ist e ri a l duty

to i mme diate ly forwa rd the applications and relate d rec ords in cause numbers W06-49271-T(A) , W05-45718-T(A) , and W05-45713-T(A ), filed in the 283 J udicial District Court of Da llas County to this C ourt. rd We c on dit ion a lly

g ra nt m and amus re lie f a

nd direct the Re sp on de nt t o c omp ly wi th t his op ini on . Th e wr it o f m and amus wi ll i ssu e on ly in t he e ve nt t he Re sp on de nt f

a ils to c omp ly

wi thi n thirty day s of the date of this opinion.

Filed: Mar ch 24, 2010 Do no t pu bli sh