## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-80,035-01

EX P ARTE ST EVEN MCQUEEN WILLIAMS, App licant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. W08-41179-X IN THE CRIMINA L DIST RICT COURT NO. 6 F ROM DALLAS COUNTY

Per curiam . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleade d guilty to murder, and was sentenc ed to thirty

y ear s’ imprisonment. Applicant contends, among other things, that his plea was not knowing ly and voluntaril y enter ed, and that his trial counsel rende red i n ef fec tive assistance beca

use he advised Applicant incorre ctly and failed to enfor ce the conditions of the plea agre em en t

. Applicant was orig inally char g ed with capital murder, but the State agree d to let him plead to the lesser offe nse of murder in exchang e for his te stimony ag ainst two co-de fenda nts. Applicant turned down a twenty -year plea-2-

offe r, and decide d to enter an open plea to the trial court. This decision was based in part on trial counsel’s repr esentations that he knew the trial judge , J ohn Nelms, who was a visiti ng judge at the time Applicant enter ed his plea. Counsel advised Applicant that he would likely rec eive a sentenc e

on the low end of the punishment rang e. Counsel conce des that he told Applica n t ’s m o t h er that Applicant would rec eive no more t h an fiftee n y ear s’ imprisonment if he enter ed an open plea to J udg e Nelms and testi fied ag ainst his co -d ef en d ants

. Applicant did testify ag ainst both of hi s codefe ndants, and a

ppare ntly helped to sec ure c onvictions in both of the co-de fenda nts’ case s. After Applicant had enter ed his plea to J udg e Nelms and testified in his co-de fenda nts’ trials, the sitti ng judge of the t ri al court, J eanine Howar d, returne d from an absenc e and took over from J udg e Nelms. J udg e Howar d g rante d new trials in both of Applicant’s co-de fenda nts’ case s, in part beca use she believed that Applicant had g iven perjure d testimony and in part beca use of Brady violations by the State. J udg e Howar d also conducte d Applicants’ sentenc ing, over the objections of defe nse counsel, and sentenc ed Applicant to thirty y ear s’ imprisonment. Applicant had waived his right to appe al as pa

rt of the a g ree ment with the State. The trial cou rt h as deter

mined that trial counsel' s perf ormanc e was not defic ient and finds that there was no expectation at the time that Applicant enter ed his guilty plea and waived his rig ht to appea l that he would be s en t en ce d b y J udg e Nelms, or t hat he would rec eive a sentenc e of less t han twenty y ear s’ imprisonment. Howeve r, this Court believes that Applicant relied o n t h e

err oneous repr esenta

tions of his trial attorney in a g ree ing to ple ad guilty and testify ag ainst his c odefe ndants. Relief is grante d. The judg ment in Cause No. W08-41179-X in the Criminal District Court N o. 6 District Court of Dallas County is se t a side, and Applicant is rema nded to the custody of the Sherif

f of Da llas County

to answer

the cha rg es as se t out in the indictment. The trial court-3-

shall issue any

nece ssary

bench w arr ant within 10 day s after the mandate of this Court issues. Co p ie s of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice-Corr ectional Institut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Deliver ed: Fe bruar

y 5, 2014 Do not publish