## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-22,317-20

EX P ARTE JERRY WILSO N, Applicant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 2010-447-C1D IN THE 19T H DISTRICT COURT

F ROM Mc LENNAN COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Crimi n al P ro ce d ure, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y o u n g , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted in 201 0 o f t wo counts of theft and was sentenc ed to two concur rent terms of seven y ear s in prison. These two seveny ear sentenc es wer e stacke d on a prior twenty -y ear sentenc e for unauthorized use of a motor that was imposed in 1991. Applicant states that he was rele ased to parole or mandatory supervision on the prior UUMV sentenc e, that the twenty -y ear sentenc e has discharg ed, but that prison officia ls are not considering the sentenc e to have discharg ed. Applicant there fore claims that the discharg e dates on t h e t wo-2-

seven- y ear theft sentenc es that wer e stacke d on the UUMV twenty -y ear sentenc e are not being

corr ectly calc ulated. Applicant states that he has attempted to resolve the issue by exhausting it with prison officia ls but has not rec eived a response for over 180 day s. See T E X . G O V ’ T C O D E § 501.0081; Ex parte Stokes , 15 S.W .3d 532 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). There is no aff idavit in the habea s rec ord reg ardingthe time calc ulations made by prison officia ls. Applicant has alleg ed fact s t h at , if true, might entitle him to relief

. Ex parte Spann, 132 S.W .3d 390 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). I n these circumstance s, additional fac ts are n ee d ed

. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropr iate for

um for finding s of fa ct. The trial court shall order the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice’s Offic e of the Gene ral Counsel to respond to Applicant’s c laim that prison officials a re not c onsidering the prior UU MV sentenc e to have discharg ed and that the discharg e dates on the stacke d seven- y ear sentenc es are being improperly calc ulated. The aff idavit should also indicate whether Applicant has submitt ed his claim to the time cre dit resolution sy stem, and if so, the da te when the claim was submitted. T o re s olve the issues, the trial court may obtain an aff idavit or it may order deposi t i o n s , interrog atories or hold a hear ing. I f the trial court elec ts to hold a hear ing, it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repr esent Applicant at the hear ing. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. The trial court shall make finding s of fac t an d co nclusions of law reg arding Applicant’s cl ai m , an d t he trial court shall also make any other finding s of fac t and conclusions of law that i t deems re levant and a

ppropriate to the dispositi on of Applica nt’s claim for ha

beas c orpus re lief.-3-

This application will be held in abey ance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s of this order

. A suppl em en t al t ra n script containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hear ing or deposition, along with 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: August 20, 2014 Do not publish