## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-83,127-01

EX P ARTE RANDY K

AIZER, A ppl icant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 10CR2388-A IN THE 28T H DISTRICT COURT

F ROM NUECES 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. App. 1967). Applicant was convic t ed o f one count of cont i nuous sexual abuse of a child, one count of indece ncy with a child, and two counts of ag g rava ted sexual assault of a child. He was sentenc ed to six ty y ear s’ imprisonment for the continuous sexual abuse and ag g ravated sexual assault counts, and twenty y ear s’ imprisonment for the indece ncy with a child count , all running concur rently
. The Thirteenth Court of Appea ls aff irmed his conviction. Kaizer v. State , No. 1 3-11-00566- CR (Tex. App. — Corpus Christi–2

Edinburg , J une 13, 2013, pet. r ef’ d.) (not designated f or publication). App li c a nt c o nte n d s , a

mo n g other things, that his trial counsel rende red ineffe ctive assistance 1 beca use counsel told the trial court that Applicant would not be testifying despite Applicant’s desire to testify on his own behalf
. Applicant alleg es that trial counsel did not consult with him until two months after he had bee n appointed in this case. Applicant also alleg es t hat t rial counsel failed to investigate and prese nt evidenc e that Applicant lacke d the opportunity to commit the offe nses, and failed to inve stigate Applicant’s claim that it was the complainant’s fathe r, and not A pplicant who
co m m i t t ed the offe nses. Applicant alleg es that trial counsel failed to call char acte r witnesses t o testify at the punishment stag e. 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 r espond to A pplicant’s claims 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 dete rmine whe ther Applica nt is indi g ent. I f Appl icant is indige nt 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. The trial c ourt shall first supplement the habe as re cord w ith a copy of the indictment upon which Applicant was tried in this case . The trial court shall make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to whether the perf ormanc e of Applicant’s trial counsel was defic ient and, if so, whether
This Court has review ed Applica nt’s other c laims and finds them to be without merit. 13

counsel’s defic ient perf

ormanc e prejudice d Applicant. The trial court sh al l al s o make any other finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law that it de ems rele vant and a ppropriate to the dispositi on of Applicant’s c laim for habe as cor pus relief
. 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 of this order
. A s up p l em en t al transcr ipt containing 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 t ime shall be obtained f

rom this Court. Filed: Apr il 29, 2015 Do not publish