Court Opinion

ID: 9684856
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 14:16:45.429253+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:00.624407
License: Public Domain

MANSFIELD, Judge,
concurring.
Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.071; § 4(a), requires that an application for writ of habeas corpus “must be filed in the convicting court no later than the 180th day after the date the court of criminal appeals appoints counsel under Section 2.... ” We have interpreted § 4(f) to allow the convicting court to grant a 90-day extension for filing of the application, meaning, in effect, counsel has 270 days from the date of appointment to file the application. Section 4(g) clearly provides that failure to comply with the deadlines for filing the application described above constitutes a waiver of all grounds for relief available to the applicant had his application been filed in a timely manner.1
In the present ease, applicant’s counsel did not file the application within the initial 180-*612day filing period nor within the 90-day extension period. After expiration of the 90-day extension, counsel received an additional extension of 30 days from the convicting court, though this extension is not authorized by the statute. Counsel did not file the application during that unauthorized 30-day extension. Finally, 9 days later, counsel filed the application — 39 days late.
I agree that it would be unfair to dismiss applicant’s application as having been untimely filed had counsel filed it within the 30-day unauthorized extension granted by the convicting court. Reliance upon the court order granting that extension was not unreasonable and establishes good cause for the first 30 days of the violation of the filing deadline. Given this is a capital case and dismissal of an application for habeas relief as having been untimely filed potentially has life or death consequences, it would be an injustice to punish applicant for, in effect, relying in good faith on a court order giving counsel additional time to file what, in all likelihood, is his one application for state habeas relief.
However, nothing in the record justifies or excuses the additional 9-day delay in the filing of this application. Given the utter absence of good cause for this additional delay, this Court cannot simply ignore the Legislature’s determination that applications for habeas corpus relief under Article 11.071 must be filed within specified time deadlines. As post-conviction habeas corpus is a statutorily-based form of relief,2 it is our task to follow the law as set forth by the Legislature, and we are not free to substitute our own personal beliefs/feelings as to what is fair given the Legislature’s clearly-expressed intent.
With these comments, I join the opinion of the Court.

. Certain claims are not barred by failure to file timely one’s application as set forth in Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.071, § 5(a).

. See Ex parte Davis, 947 S.W.2d 216, 221-223 (Tex.Crim.App.1996).