Order filed May 6 , 2014 .

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14 - 10 - 00448 - CR NO. 14 - 10 - 00449 - CR

____________ DENWITT ZACK WILLIAM S , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 209th District Court

Harris County, Te xas Trial Court Cause No s . 1207434 & 1207435



### ORDER This court affirmed appellant’s convictions for aggravated robbery and felon in possession of a firearm, and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused appellant’s petition for discretionary review. See Williams v. State, Nos. 14

- 10

- 00448

- CR & 14

- 10

- 00449

- C R, 2011 WL1662951 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] May 3, 2011, pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication). On April 2, 2014, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied appellant’s application for pos t
-conviction writs of habeas corpus pursuant to article 11.07 of the Texas Code of

Criminal Procedure
. See Ex parte Williams, Nos. WR

- 61,380

- 02 & WR

- 61,380

- 03 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 2, 2014) (denying application without written order based on trial court’s findings). Appellant now seeks copies of h is trial records and records related to his application for post

- conviction writs without payment of costs for use in preparation of a nother application for post

- conviction writs of habeas corpus
. A n indigent crim inal defendant is entitled to a free record for his direct appeal. See Britt v. North Carolina , 404 U. S. 226, 227, 92 S.Ct. 431, 433 (1971) ; see also Abdnor v. State , 712 S.W.2d 136, 139 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)
. The United States Constitution does not manda te that a n indigent criminal defendant be provided a free record of prior proceedings for use in pursuing post

- conviction habeas corpus relief. See United States v. MacCollom , 426 U.S. 317, 322

– 23, 328, 96 S.Ct. 2086, 2090, 2093 (1976). While federal statu tes may provide indigent defendants access to a free record in some circumstances, Texas has no such requirement. See, e.g., 28 U.S. § 753(f). In Texas, a criminal defendant is not entitled to a free copy of the record once he has exhausted his direct app eal, absent some compelling, recognized reason . See Eubanks v. Mullin , 909 S.W.2d 574, 576

– 77 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth 1995, orig. proceeding ). I ndigent defendants are also not entitled to a copy of the trial record at county expense to pursue a pro se petiti on for discretionary review
. Ex parte Trainer , 181 S.W.3d 358, 359 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)
. There is no general duty to provide trial records without charge for the purpose of seeking post
- conviction habeas corpus relief. Escobar v. State, 880 S.W.2d 7 82 , 7 84 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] pet. ref’d ). A free record is available for seeking post

conviction habeas relief only if the defendant shows the habeas corpus applicationis not frivolous and there is a specific need for the trial records that are sough t. See

In re Strickhausen , 994 S.W.2d 936, 937 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.) ; In re Coronado , 980 S.W.2d 691, 693 (Tex. App
. — San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding)
. Appellant has made no such showing in this case. Accordingly, we DENY appellan t’s request to be provided with copies of his trial records without cost.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Donovan and Brown.