## 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-92,635-01

EX P ARTE AMBER LYNN HAUG EN, Appl icant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. A-16-1450- CR IN THE 70TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM ECTOR COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant was convicted of super- ag g rava ted sexual assault of a child and sentenc ed to life imprisonment without possibili ty of p a r o le

. T he Eleventh Court of Appea ls aff irmed her conviction

. Haugen v. Stat e , No. 11-17-00305-CR (Tex. App. — Eastland October 31, 2019) (not desig nated for publication). Applicant filed this application for a wr i t o f h abea s corpus in the county of conviction, and the district cler k forwa rded it to this Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. Applicant contends, among other things, th at trial counsel was ineffe ctive beca use trial 1 counsel failed to strike biased jurors, and that she was denied her rig ht to testify on her own behalf

.

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

Applicant has alleg ed fa cts that, if true, mig ht entitle her to re lief. Strickland v. W ashington , 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Acc ording ly , the record should be developed. The trial court is t h e ap p ropriate forum for finding s of fac t. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claims. Specifica lly , trial counsel shall state whether he believed that venire members Carolina Vene g as, Randi Pineda and Gre g ory Swenton made statements during voir dire that could have led to succe ssful challeng es for cause or pere mptory challeng es, and if so, why trial counsel did not challeng e or exercise pere mptory strikes on those venire members. Trial counsel shall also state w hether he advise d Applicant that the de cision of whethe r or not to testify

on her own behalf was Applica nt’s decision to make, a

nd whether Applicant expressed a desire to testify on her own behalf at either the g uilt or punishment st ag e of tria l. I n developing the re cord, the trial cour

t may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). I f the trial c ourt elec ts to hold a hear ing, it shall dete rmine whe ther Applica nt is indi g ent. I f Applica nt is indi g ent and wants to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to repr esent her at the hear ing. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. I f counsel is appointed or reta ined, the trial court shall immediately notify this Court of counsel’s name

. The trial court shall first supplement the rec ord with a copy of the voir dire transcr ipt. The trial court shall then make finding s of fac t and con cl u s i ons of law as to whether trial counsel’s perf ormanc e was defic ient and Applicant wa s prejudice d. The trial court shall also make finding s and conclusions as to whether Applicant was denied the rig ht to testify on her own behalf

. The trial court may make any other finding s and conclusions that it d ee m s ap p ro priate in response to Applicant’s c laims. The trial court shall make findings of fac t and conclusions of l aw within ninet y d ay s from3

the date of this order

. The district cler k shall then immediately forwa rd to this Court the trial court’s finding s and conclusions and the rec ord develope d on rema nd, including, among other things, aff idavits, motions, objections, proposed finding s and conclusions , order s, and transcr ipts from hear ings and depositions. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 4). Any extensions of time must be reque sted by the trial cour

t and obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: May

19, 2021 Do not publish