Court Opinion

ID: 4328838
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2018-11-08 06:39:52.866236+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:46:54.578944
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
                         OF TEXAS
                                         NO. WR-89,097-01

                EX PARTE JOSHUA ANDERSON FANT-CLARK, Applicant

                  ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
                   CAUSE NO. 18,368A IN THE 21ST DISTRICT COURT
                           FROM WASHINGTON 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 and was convicted

of robbery and sentenced to seventeen years’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction.

        Applicant contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he coerced

Applicant into pleading guilty by telling him that he would be severely punished if he did not accept

the State’s plea offer and by telling him that he could not do an open plea to the judge. The State

contends that Applicant was indicted for aggravated robbery and allowed to plead guilty to robbery,

but the habeas record forwarded to this Court reflects that Applicant waived the indictment and was
                                                                                                      2

charged by complaint and information with a simple robbery.

       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. 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 make findings as to what Applicant was

charged with, and whether this plea resulted in any other offenses being dismissed. The trial court

shall make findings as to the punishment range Applicant was facing had he chosen not to accept the

plea offer in this cause. 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 must

be requested by the trial court and shall be obtained from this Court.

Filed: November 7, 2018
Do not publish