Opinion
No. AP-75,568.
Delivered: December 13, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH.
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 241-230-04 IN THE 241 ST DISTRICT COURT FROM SMITH COUNTY
OPINION
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 writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex.Crim.App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of less than four grams of cocaine and sentenced to forty years' imprisonment after he was found to have previously been convicted of a felony. The Seventh Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Lewis v. State, No. 07-04-386-CR (Tex.App.-Amarillo, del'd May 18, 2005, no pet.) Applicant contends, inter alia, that his sentence is illegal because the notice of intent to seek enhancement of punishment failed to allege that Applicant's prior convictions were sequential. We remanded this application to the trial court for findings of fact and conclusions of law. The State provided Applicant notice that it was seeking enhancement of his punishment because he had previously been convicted of two felony offenses. However, that notice did not allege that the offense underlying one of his prior convictions was committed after his conviction in the other had become final, and did not allege that enhancement was being sought pursuant to Penal Code § 12.42(d). The notice was adequate to allege enhancement pursuant to Penal Code § 12.42(a)(3). An indictment which alleges a facially valid offense may not be construed as alleging a greater offense on the theory that an additional element may have been inadvertently omitted. Thomason v. State, 892 S.W.2d 8 (Tex.Crim.App. 1994). The notice here was inadequate to support a finding that Applicant was a habitual offender, and the sentence imposed here is illegal because it exceeds the maximum for a third degree felony enhanced pursuant to § 12.42(a)(3). Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. 241-230-04 in the 241st Judicial District Court of Smith County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Smith County for a new assessment of punishment. Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — Correctional Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.