## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-83,143-01

EX P ARTE DANIEL GLENN CRIP P EN, Appl icant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 24043-A(1) IN THE 42ND DIST RICT COURT

F ROM TAYLOR COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1

. 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 was convicted of ag g ravated sexual assault of a child and sentenc ed to twenty -five y ear s’ imprisonment. The Eleventh Court of Appea ls aff irmed his c onviction. Crippen v

. State , 368 S.W .3d 630 (Tex. App. — Eastland, April 5, 2012, pet. re f’d)

. A p p li c a nt c o nten d s , a

mong other things, that his trial counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance 1

This Court has review ed Applica nt’s other c laims and finds them to be without merit. 12

for various rea sons. Applicant alleg es that counsel should have challeng ed the makeup of the g rand jury that returne d the indictment in this case , beca use Applicant told counsel that the fore man of the g rand jury who signe d the indictment was trying to g et Applicant out of the way so that he could date the mother of Applicant’s daughter. Applicant alleg es that counsel failed to play a rec ording of the second interview conducte d with the complainant’s brother, which, acc ording to Applicant, would have supported the conclusion that i t wa s a strang er, rathe r than Applicant, who committed this offe nse. Applicant alleg es that he wanted counsel to ask him on the stand whether he had coac hed the complainant into g iving he r initial a ccount of the offe nse (whe rein the complainant appar ently said it had been a strang er and not A pplicant who committed the offe nse), but that counsel ref used to do so. Finally , Applicant alleg es that counse l failed to bring up the “DNA or lack there of.” Appar ently , Applicant was told during his interrog ation that his DNA was a match for evidenc e collecte d from the complainant at the hospital, but he does not be lieve that such evidenc e exis ted. Applicant has alleg ed fac ts that, if true, might entitle him to relief

. Strickland v. W

ashington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson , 993 S.W .2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these circ umstances, additional fac ts are neede d. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez , 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropr iate forum for finding s of fac t. The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of i neff ective assistance of cou n s el

. The trial court may use any means set out in T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d). In the appropr iate ca se, the trial c ourt may rely on its personal re collection. Id

. I f the trial c ourt elec ts to hold a hearing , it shall determine whe ther Applicant is indig ent. I f Applicant is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by cou n s el , the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repre sent Applicant at the hearing. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04.3

T h e tri al court shall make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to whether the perf ormanc e of Applicant’s trial counsel was defic ient and , i f so, whether counsel’s defic ient perf ormanc e prejudice d Applicant. The trial court shall also make any other finding s of fac t and conclusions of law that it deems rele vant and appropr iate to the dispositi on of Applicant’s claim for habea s corpus re lief. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this o rd er . A s up plemental transcript containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, alongwith the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court withi n 120 day s of t he date of t his order

. Any extensions of ti me shall be obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: May

13, 2015 Do not publish