Court Opinion

ID: 4453674
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-11-07 05:22:05.049278+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:53:24.289704
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
                         OF TEXAS
                                         NO. WR-90,189-01

                      EX PARTE NORBERTO MANZANARES, Applicant

                ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
             CAUSE NO. 05-CR-00000889-D IN THE 103RD DISTRICT COURT
                           FROM CAMERON 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 was convicted of murder and

sentenced to thirty-five years’ imprisonment. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his

conviction. Manzanares v. State, No. 13-06-00307-CR (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg Jul.

29, 2008) (not designated for publication).

        Applicant contends that newly available scientific evidence undermines the scientific basis

for trial testimony about the time of death determination. He also argues, among other things, that

trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because counsel did not challenge expert testimony
                                                                                                       2

about the time of death based on the methodology used by the expert witness.

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

466 U.S. 668 (1984); TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.073. 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). In the appropriate case, the trial court may rely

on its personal recollection. Id.

        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 specific findings addressing

Applicant’s Article 11.073 claim. 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

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time must
                                                                         3

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

Filed: November 6, 2019
Do not publish