## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-83,344-01

EX P ARTE JES SE RAY ROSE, Ap plicant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. B11690-1 IN THE 198T H DISTRICT COURT

F ROM K

ERR COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1

. 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 (Tex. Crim

. Ap p . 1 9 6 7). Applicant was convicted of ag g ravated robber y and sentenc ed to eighty y ear s’ imprisonment. The Four th Court of Appea ls aff

irmed his convicti o n . Rose v. State , No. 04-12-00550- CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio Oct. 9, 2013)(not desig nated f

or publication). Applicant conte n d s that his trial counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance beca use counsel failed to investig ate the unide ntified DNA sample found on the mask used duringthe commission2

of the offe ns e, fa i l ed t o inform Applicant as to the streng th of the State’s case in order to assist Applicant in the determination of whether or not t o ac cept the State’s pl ea offer , failed to divulge the contents of Applicant’s jail phone calls prior to Applicant reje cting the State’s plea offe r, failed to introduce the testimony from Applicant’s parole revoc ation hearing wher ein the co mp l ai n ing witness testified that Applicant was not the person who robbed him, and failed to challeng e the lack of Applica

nt’s fing erpr ints at the scene

. 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). 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 appropr iate forum for finding s of fac t. The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of i neff ective as s i s t an ce 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 hearing , it sha ll de termine whether Applicant is indigent. I f Applicant is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the tri al co u rt 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 cour t s h al l make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to whether the perf ormanc e of Applicant’s t ri al counsel was defic ient and, if so, whether counsel’s defic ient perf ormanc e prejudice d Applicant. 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. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 day s o f t h i s o rder

. A supplemental transcr ipt containing all3

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, 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 time shall be obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: Jul y

1, 2015 Do not publish