## 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-81,237-02 AND WR-81,237-03

EX P ARTE ROBERT SHAYNE KINSLOW, App licant

ON AP P LICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NOS. CR01648-HC-2 AN D CR01649- HC-2 IN THE 6TH DISTRICT COURT F ROM RED RIVER C OUNTY

Per curiam . Alcala, J., filed a concurring opinion . O R D E R Pursuant to the provision s o f Ar t i cle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court these applications for writ s o f h ab ea s co rpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Ap p l icant was convicted of two offe nses of indece ncy with a child and sentenc ed to twe nty y ear s’ imprisonment in eac h case , with the sentenc es cumulate d to forty y ear s. Applicant was initially place d on defe rre d adjudication community supervision. He alleg es trial counsel misled him to b el i ev e t h at, if the defe rre d probations wer e revoke d, he would fac e a maxi mum of twenty y ear s in prison, but in rea lity , the sentenc es could be and wer e cumulated upon

revoc ation to forty y ear s. He there fore alleg es that his guilty pleas wer e not voluntary

. Applicant also2

contends that the trial judge’ s sentenc es wer e prede termined, and counsel failed to object to this, based on comments the trial judge had previously made and based on the fac t that the trial judge did not conduct a sentenc ing hear ing afte r revoc ation, but instead, imposed the maxi mum sentenc es and then cumulate d t h em. Appli cant also raises an illega l sentenc e claim and a double j eopar dy claim that lack mer it. Applicant has alleg ed fac ts that, if true, might entitle him to relief

. In these circ umstances, additional fac ts are ne eded. 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 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 persona l rec ollection. Id

. I f the trial court elec ts to hold a hear ing, it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to r epre 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 court shall make find i n gs o f fact and conclusions of law in reg ard to Applicant’s claim that his p l ea s wer e involuntary and his claim that the trial judge had prede termined the sentenc es upon revoc ation. See Strickland v. W ashington , 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). 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 disposition of Applicant’s cla im 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 th i s o rd er . A supplemental 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, along with the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall3

be for war ded to this Court withi n 120 day s of the date of t his order

. Any extensions of ti me must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court.

Filed: Oc tober 5, 2016 Do not publish