Court Opinion

ID: 4189739
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-07-26 21:23:29.376213+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:14:03.286863
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
                            OF TEXAS
                                         NO. WR-86,945-01

                            EX PARTE JOSE DIAZ PEREZ, Applicant

                    ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
                      CAUSE NO. 18373 IN THE 2ND DISTRICT COURT
                              FROM CHEROKEE 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 fifty years’ imprisonment. The Twelfth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction.

Perez v. State, No. 12-14-00116-CR (Tex. App. — Tyler, May 29, 2015) (not designated for

publication).

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

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

because trial counsel failed to adequately argue that Applicant’s statements had been taken in

violation of the Vienna Convention, failed to object to improper closing arguments by the prosecutor,

failed to obtain a ruling on the defense motion in limine prior to trial, failed to object to errors in the

jury charge, and failed to provide case law to support Applicant’s claim that his personal writings

were improperly seized.

        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
                                                                                                   3

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

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

Filed: July 26, 2017
Do not publish