From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ex parte Coppock

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS
Mar 1, 2017
NO. WR-86,343-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Mar. 1, 2017)

Opinion

NO. WR-86,343-01

03-01-2017

EX PARTE BRANDON SCOTT COPPOCK, Applicant


ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. W12-27931-L(A) IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 5 FROM DALLAS 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 sexual assault of a child and sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. The Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Coppock v. State, No. 05-13-00908-CR (Tex. App. — Dallas, April 20, 2015) (not designated for publication).

Applicant contends, among other things, that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because counsel failed to object to the introduction of extraneous offense evidence on the basis that the State had not provided the requisite notice of intent to introduce the evidence, failed to request that the State elect which act(s) it would rely upon to prove the charge, failed to investigate and challenge the collection of evidence by the State, failed to call available witnesses for the defense, and failed to present available witnesses and evidence in mitigation of punishment.

This Court has considered Applicant's other claims and finds them to be without merit.

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 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 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 be requested by the trial court and shall be obtained from this Court. Filed: March 1, 2017
Do not publish


Summaries of

Ex parte Coppock

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS
Mar 1, 2017
NO. WR-86,343-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Mar. 1, 2017)
Case details for

Ex parte Coppock

Case Details

Full title:EX PARTE BRANDON SCOTT COPPOCK, Applicant

Court:COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

Date published: Mar 1, 2017

Citations

NO. WR-86,343-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Mar. 1, 2017)