## 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-85,903-01, WR- 85,903-02, WR-85,903- 03 AND WR- 85,903-04

EX P ARTE WILL IAM JAM ES AKIN, Applicant

ON AP P LICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NOS. CR-13-24796-A , CR-13- 24979-A, CR-13-24791- A AND C R-13-24795- A

IN THE 336T H DISTRICT COURT FROM F ANNIN C OUNTY

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). Appli cant was convicted of three char ges o f indece ncy with a child by contac t and one char g e of sexual assault of a child, and was sentenc ed to four twenty -y ear sentenc es, to be serve d concur rently

. The Six th Cour t of Appea ls aff irmed hi s convictions. Akin v. State , No. 06-14-00178-CR (Tex. App. — Texarkana , Sept. 16, 2015) (not desig nated f

or publication).2

Applicant contends, among other things, t h at his trial counsel and appellate counsel both 1 rende red ineffe ctive assist ance . Applicant allege s that his trial counsel was ineff ec tive for failing to object to the testimony of Fa nnin County Sheriff Serg eant J acob Ba rker , who testified about items he found on Applicant’s laptop computer. Applicant alleg es that appellate counsel was ineffe ctive for failing to arg

ue on direc t appea l that the trial court had err ed by admitting, o v er d ef ense objection, the testimony

of Applica

nt’s ex-wife Misti Akin. 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 and appellate counsel to respond to Applicant’s cl ai m s o f ineffe ctive assistance of counsel. T h e 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). In the appr opriate c ase, the trial court may rely on its personal re collection. Id

. I f the trial c ourt elec ts to hold a he aring , it sha ll de termine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is i n d i gent and wishes 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. T h e t rial court shall make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to whether t h e perf ormanc e of A

pplicant’s trial c ounsel was de ficient a nd, if so, whether

trial counsel’ s defic ient perf ormanc e prejudice d Applicant. The trial court shall also make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to wh et h er the perf ormanc e of Applicant’s appellate counsel was defic ient and, if so, whether appellate counsel’s defic ient perf ormanc e prejudice d Applicant. The trial court shall also

This Court has considere d Applicant’s other claims, and finds them to be w ithout merit. 13

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 Applica

nt’s claims for ha

beas c orpus 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 transcr ipt 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 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 t his Court within 120 day s of the date of this order. A ny extensions of ti me must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court.

Filed: Nove mber 16, 2016 Do not publish