## 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 NOS. WR-55,332-02 & WR-55,332-03

EX P ARTE MARLON LAMON HOODYE, Appli cant

ON AP P LICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NOS. CR-00-201-A& CR- 00-532-A IN THE 22ND DIST RICT COURT F ROM HAYS COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R 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 these applications for wr i t s o f h ab ea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of assault of

a public serva

nt and burg lary of a habit a tion and sentenc ed to ten y ear s’ imprisonment on eac h cause . Applicant contends that his counsel render ed ineffec tive assistance beca use counsel failed to timely file a notice of appea l. He also alleg es that counsel should have challeng ed the cumulation order s entere d on both judgments. 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); Ex parte2

Axe l , 757 S.W .2d 369 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988); Ex parte Townsend , 137 S.W .3d 79, 81 (Tex. Crim. Ap p . 2 0 0 4); Ex parte Barley , 842 S.W .2d 694 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). In these circ umstances, additional fac ts are neede d. As we he ld in Ex parte Rodriguez , 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the tria l court is the appr opriate f orum for f

indings of f

act. The trial court sha ll order counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of ineffe ctive assistance of counsel. 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)

. 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 to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repre sent 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 a finding as t o whether Applicant waived hi s rig ht to appea l the imposit ion of the cumulation order . The trial c ourt shall make f indings of f

act a nd conclusions of law as to whether Applicant was denied his rig ht to a meaning ful appea l beca use Applicant’s counsel failed to timely file a notice of appea l. 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. These applications 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 orde r. A supplemental transcript c ontaining 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 the date of t his order

. Any extensions of ti me must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court.

Filed: January

11, 2017 Do not publish