Court Opinion

ID: 2950428
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-16 06:42:55.594148+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:07:58.030901
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
                             OF TEXAS
                                         NO. WR-83,305-01

                      EX PARTE JOSE ELIAS PEREZ-GUERRA, Applicant

                 ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
             CAUSE NO. 2008CRN000610-D1 (A) IN THE 49TH DISTRICT COURT
                               FROM WEBB COUNTY

        Per curiam.

                                              ORDER

        Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleaded guilty to murder and was

sentenced to forty years’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction.

        Applicant contends, among other things,1 that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance

because counsel did not explore or raise a self-defense theory. Applicant alleges that he was acting

in self-defense because the victim was threatening him with a weapon and attempting to sexually

        1
            This Court has considered Applicant’s other claims and finds them to be without merit.
                                                                                                        2

assault him.

        Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these

circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294

(Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court

shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Specifically, trial counsel shall state whether there was any evidence to indicate that Applicant acted

in self-defense, and if so, why trial counsel did not advise Applicant to go to trial and try to establish

self defense rather than pleading guilty. The trial court may use any means set out in TEX . CODE

CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d).

        If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent.

If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an

attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 26.04.

        The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether the

performance of Applicant’s trial counsel was deficient and, if so, whether counsel’s deficient

performance prejudiced Applicant. The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and

conclusions of law that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant’s claim for

habeas corpus relief.

        This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall
                                                                                                3

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time shall

be obtained from this Court.

Filed: June 10, 2015
Do not publish