## 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-42,338-04

EX P ARTE DEMOND LAMONT WILSON, App licant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. WRIT008761 IN THE 354 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM HUNT 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 this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Te x . C ri m . App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of ag gravated robber y and sente nced to twe nty

year s’ imprisonment. Applicant contends that he is being denied cre dit for time spent on parole prior to revoc ation, but in custody for a new offe nse. He alleg es that he was restra ined by an un-executed pre- revoc ation

war rant (blue war

rant). Ex par t e C

a n a d a , 754 S.W .2d 660, 668 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). He specific ally alleg es that he tried to post bond on the new charg es, but “Da llas Cou nty ran a NCI C/ T C I C , ” and a parole hold cause d by the war rant meant he rema ined in jail until he was2

transfe rre d back to prison. The habea s court has made supplemental findin gs and rec ommends granting relief

. Among other things, the habea s court has found that “[t] he eff ect of a prisoner having

an active war

rant while confine d on another charg e in a differ ent county is should that prisoner make bond, then i n all likelihood any outstanding warr ant would be served and the prisoner h eld on the active w arr ant.” The rec ord contains an aff idavit from the custodian of reco rd s from the Dallas County Sheriff’ s Offic e attesting that a mag istrate set a bond on the Dallas County cause that was a basis for Applicant’s parole revoc ation. The aff idavit conclude s that, si n ce b o nd was set, Applicant was elig ib l e t o p ost bond. This could s ug g est that the “issued” pre- revoc ation war rant would not have preve nted Applicant f

rom posting bond a

nd beingrele ased. 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 appropriate forum for finding s of fac t. The trial court shall order the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice’s Offic e of the Gene ral Counsel to file an aff

idavit addre ssing sever al issues. The aff idavit shal l s p ecif

y in detail what proce ss is used when a parole violator war rant is “published” by the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice’s Parole Division, and to whom the war rant is published. The aff idavit shall state the Parole Division’s policy , if any , addre ssing whe n parole violation warra nts are to be executed afte r being issued and published. The trial court shall also order the Dallas County Sheriff’ s Depa rtment to file an aff

idavit as

an additional response to Applicant’s claims. The aff idavit shall state whether Applicant attempted to post bond in Cause Number F- 1541481-W in the 363 Dist ri ct Court. The aff idavit shall state rd3

whether Applicant was ever under a detainer or hold for the parole violator war rant in this case . The 1 aff idavit shall state the Sherif f’s Office ’s pol icy , if any , rela ting to the release of jail inmates with issued or published parole violator war rants t h at h ave not been executed. Specifica lly , is it the Sheriff’ s Offic e’s policy or prac tice to enfor ce or execute parole violator war rants in the event that

a jail inmate posts bond on a differ ent, pending charg e? Also, if Applicant had posted bond on Cause Number F- 1541481-W afte r August 11, 2015, would he have been rele ased from custody , or would the published parole revoc ation war rant have pre vented his re lease ? The trial c ourt 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)

. The trial court shall deter mine whether Applicant is indig ent. I f Applicant is indig ent and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repr esent Applicant in these habe as cor

pus proce eding s. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. The trial court shall make any supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law that it deems rele vant and appropr i at e t o t he dispositi on of Applicant’s claim for habea s corpus relief

. Should the response s to this rema nd order raise new fac t questions or prese nt conflicting fac t issues, the trial cour

t’s supplemental finding s shall resolve them. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues sh al l b e re s o l ved within 90 day s of this order

. A supplemental transcript containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of the 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 this order

. Any extensions of ti me must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court.

Documents in the re cord sug g est that this was war rant number

08112015-052119312. 14

Filed: Dec ember

13, 2017 Do not publish