Opinion
No. 10-13-00063-CR
05-09-2013
EX PARTE VICENTE GODINEZ
From the 18th District Court
Johnson County, Texas
Trial Court No. F46393A
ABATEMENT ORDER
On April 11, 2013, we received appellant Vincente Godinez's motion to abate this appeal for entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law by the trial court. In his motion, appellant asserts that the trial court should have issued findings of fact and conclusions of law because his habeas-corpus application was not denied as frivolous. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.072, § 7(a) (West 2005) ("If the court determines from the face of an application or documents attached to the application that the applicant is manifestly entitled to no relief, the court shall enter a written order denying the application as frivolous. In any other case, the court shall enter a written order including findings of fact and conclusions of law."). In its February 1, 2013 order, the trial court noted that: "[T]he Court finds that Applicant is manifestly entitled to no relief." At no point did the trial court specify that appellant's habeas-corpus application was denied as frivolous.
In a similar case, the El Paso Court of Appeals stated that article 11.072, section 7(a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure requires that the trial court make a frivolous finding when it determines that the applicant is "manifestly entitled to no relief." Ex parte Enriquez, 227 S.W.3d 779, 783-84 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2005, pet. ref'd) (citing Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.072, § 7(a)); see Ex parte Jones, 367 S.W.3d 696, 697 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2012, no pet.); see also Ex parte Garcia, No. 14-10-00978-CR, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 1845, at **5-6 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Mar. 8, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). In any other case, the trial court shall enter a written order including findings of fact and conclusions of law. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.072, § 7(a); see also Ex parte Jones, 367 S.W.3d at 697; Ex parte Enriquez, 227 S.W.3d at 784.
As was the fact scenario in Ex parte Enriquez, the trial court in the instant case concluded that appellant was "manifestly entitled to no relief" but did not deny the habeas-corpus application as frivolous. See Ex parte Enriquez, 227 S.W.3d at 783-84. As such, we find the trial court's order to be unclear. Without clarification, we are unable to determine whether the trial court should have made findings of fact and conclusions of law in this case. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.072, § 7(a); Ex parte Enriquez, 227 S.W.3d at 784-85. Accordingly, we abate this appeal for the trial court to clarify its February 1, 2013 order consistent with article 11.072, section 7(a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.072, § 7(a); see also Ex parte Enriquez, 227 S.W.3d at 785.
We grant appellant's motion to abate insofar as it requests that we refer this matter to the trial court. We do not express an opinion, at this time, as to whether the trial court should have entered findings of fact and conclusions of law. After the trial court clarifies its February 1, 2013 order, we should be able to determine whether the trial court was obligated to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law in this matter.
The trial court shall, within twenty-eight days after the date of this Order make appropriate orders and, if necessary, enter findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court clerk shall (1) prepare a supplemental clerk's record containing all orders and, if necessary, findings of fact and conclusions of law made; and (2) file the supplemental clerk's record with the Clerk of this Court within forty-two days after the date of this Order.
PER CURIAM Before Chief Justice Gray,
Justice Davis, and
Justice Scoggins
Appeal abated
Do not publish
[CR25]