## 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-69,600-02

EX P ARTE EMANUEL AARON P ADILLA, Applicant

ON AP P LICATION F OR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. F R 57465-B IN THE 27TH DISTRICT COURT

F ROM BELL COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant was convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and sentenced to 15 y ears’ imprisonment. The Court of Appeals affirmed hi s c o n v i c tion. Padilla v. State, No. 03-06-00455-CR (Te x . A p p . —Austin, F ebruary 2, 2007, no pet.). Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the d istrict clerk forwarded it to this Court. S

ee T E X . C O D E C R

I M . P R O C
. art. 11.07. The current record before this Court and the trial court’s f inding s and conclusions address Applicant’s claims c oncerning his sentence and time served i n p r i s o n , on p arole, and in jail. However, Applicant’s claims also concer n t h e pending parole revocation proceeding s and the constitutionality

of Applicant’s confinement pursuant to the revocation warrant.2

Applicant contends, among other th i n gs , t h at he was arrested on a parole pre-revocation warrant on April 29, 2 020. He states that he has been in custody f or over a y e ar on a pre-revocation hold. He avers that he could have bonded out of jail on “alleg ed new charg es” if the pre-revocation warrant had not prevented him f rom doing so. Applicant asserts that he waived the preliminary hearing a nd his parole was continued to a final r evocatio n h earing , but the B oard of Pardons and Paroles still has not afforded him a final hearing

. See Morrissey v. Brewer, 4 08 U.S. 471, 488 (1972); see also Ex parte W

illiams, 738 S.W .2d 257, 259 (Tex . Crim. App. 1987). Applicant has alleg ed facts that, if true, mig h t entitle him to r e l i e f

. M orrissey, 408 U.S. at 488, 490. According ly , the record should be developed. The trial court is the appropriate forum f or finding s of fact. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C
. art. 11.07, § 3(d). T he trial court shall order the B oard of Par d ons and Paroles’ O ffice of the General Counsel to obtain a response from a person with knowledg e of relevant facts concerning the pending parole revocation procedur e s . T h e trial court shall also state whether Applicant is in custody on a r evocation a lleg ation t h a t h e c o m m i tted new offenses. T E X . G O V T ’ C O D E § 508.282(a)(1). Additionally , the trial co u r t shall c onfirm whether Applicant is in custody o n pending c harg es or c onvictions. I n developing the r ecord, the trial court may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). I f the trial court e lects to hold a hearing , it shall determine whether Applicant is indig ent. I f Applicant is indig ent and wants to be represented by counsel, the trial c ourt sh a l l appoint counsel to represent him at the hearing

. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C
. art. 26.04. I f counsel is appointed or retained, the trial court shall immediately notify this Court of counsel’s name. The trial court shall m a k e f inding s of fact and conclusions of law as to whether Applicant received a f

inal hearing within a reasonable time. See Morrissey, 408 U .S. at 488, 490; W illiams, 7383

S.W

. 2d at 259. Th e t r i al court may make any other f inding s and conclusions that it deems appropriate in response to Applicant’s claim. The t r i a l court shall make finding s of fact and conclusions of law within n inety day s from the d ate o f this order. T he district c lerk shall then immediately f orward to this Court the trial court’s finding s and conclusions and the record developed o n remand, including , among other thing s, affid avits, motions, objections, proposed finding s and conclusions, o rders, and transcripts from hearing s and depositions. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)(4). Any ex tensions of time must b e requested by the trial court and obtained from this Court.

F iled: November 3, 2021 Do not publish