Court Opinion

ID: 2950432
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-16 06:42:59.285873+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:46:16.542663
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
                             OF TEXAS
                                          NO. WR-83,319-01

                    EX PARTE SHELTON EUGENE HARTFIELD, Applicant

                    ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
                     CAUSE NO. 26352 IN THE 12TH DISTRICT COURT
                               FROM WALKER 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 entered an open plea of guilty to

evading arrest or detention, and was sentenced by a jury to eight years’ imprisonment. The

Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Hartfield v. State, No. 13-14-00046-CR (Tex.

App. — Corpus Christ – Edinburg, July 31, 2014)(not designated for publication).

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

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

because counsel failed to adequately communicate with Applicant or keep him apprised of the status

of his case. Applicant alleges that counsel did not respond to his letters, did not visit him in jail, and

did not inform him of his trial date. Applicant alleges that he never had an opportunity to discuss

the facts of the case with trial counsel.

        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 claims 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 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
                                                                                                  3

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 shall

be obtained from this Court.

Filed: June 10, 2015
Do not publish