## 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-83,391-01

EX P ARTE LANEY P AUL BREWER, App licant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. W-65081-01-E IN THE 108TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM P OTTE R COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the T ex as C o d e 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). Applican t wa s co n victed of ag g rava ted robber y and sentenc ed to fifty -one y ear s’ imprisonment. The Seventh Court of Appea ls aff irmed his conviction. Brewer v. State , No. 07-14-00040- CR (Tex. App.—Amarillo Dec. 4, 2014). Applicant contends that his appellate counsel r e n d e r e d in e f f e c ti v e a s s is ta

n c e b e c a u s e c o unsel failed to timely

notify Applicant that his conviction had be en af firmed and failed to advise him of his rig ht to petition pro se for discretionar y revie w. The appellate decision was handed down Dec ember

4, 2014. Counsel sta tes that he mailed, on Dec ember 8, 2014, a letter to Applicant with2

the decision that explained Applicant’s pro se PDR rig hts. Applicant states, howeve r, that the letter

was not rec eived until J anuar y 8, 2 0 1 5 , an d a copy of a Priority Mail envelope in the rec ord addre ssed from c ounsel to Applicant is postmarked January 7, 2015. 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 W ilson , 956 S.W

. 2 d 2 5 (Tex

. Crim. App. 1997). I n these circ umstances, additional fac ts a re neede d. Pursuant to 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 resolve the disputed fac ts. I n doing so, 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) , which shall include obta ining log s from Applica nt’s prison unit, if available , detailing his incoming leg al mail from De cembe r 4, 2014, until J anuar y 10, 2015. I f the trial c ourt elec ts to hold a hear ing, it shall determine whe ther Applica nt is indi g ent. I f Applicant is indige nt and wi s h es t o be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repre sent Applicant a t 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 and conclusions of law as to whether Applicant’s appellate counsel timely informed Applicant that his c onviction ha d been a ffirme d and that he has

a ri g ht to file a pro se petition for discretionar y revie w. The trial court shall also make any o t h er finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law that it dee ms releva nt and appr opriate to the dispositi on of Applicant’s c laim for habe as cor pus relief

. 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 supplemental transcr ipt co n t ai n i n g 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, shall3

be for war ded to this Court withi n 120 day s of t he date of t his order

. Any extensions of time shall be obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: Aug ust 26, 2015 Do not publish