Opinion
WR-91 933-01
09-15-2021
EX PARTE CHARLES ERIC MAGERS, Applicant
Do not publish
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 22753-A IN THE 258TH DISTRICT COURT FROM POLK COUNTY
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Applicant pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault of a child, and was sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction. Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07.
On April 27, 2020, the trial court entered an order designating issues. That order was not timely, but the trial court requested and obtained from this Court two extensions of time in order to conduct a hearing, prepare the record, and enter findings of fact and conclusions of law. After the last extended deadline had expired, the district clerk properly forwarded this application to this Court under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 73.4. However, the application was forwarded before the trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law. We remand this application to the trial court to complete its evidentiary investigation and make findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court's findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things, affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from hearings and depositions. See Tex. R. App. P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested by the trial court and obtained from this Court.
CONCURRING OPINION
Yeary, J., filed a concurring opinion in which Slaughter, J., joined.
In July of 2013, Applicant, Charles Eric Magers, pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault of a child and was sentenced to twenty years' imprisonment. He did not appeal. Nearly seven years later, in March of 2020, Applicant filed this application for writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, alleging his plea was involuntary and his trial counsel was ineffective. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07.
Today, the Court remands this application to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing. I agree this application should be remanded, and so I join the Court's order doing so. But I write separately, as I have previously, to address my thoughts concerning the doctrine of laches and its possible application to this case. See Ex parte Sepeda, No. WR- 92, 711-01, 2021 WL 2450089 (Tex. Crim App June 16, 2021) (per curiam) (not designated for publication) (Yeary, J, concurring) (reviewing Ex parte Smith, 444 S.W.3d 661 (Tex Crim App 2014), and the principles that justify a court's sua sponte consideration of the doctrine of laches); Ex parte Robinson, No WR-92, 406-01, 2021 WL 1395906 (Tex Crim App Apr 14, 2021) (per curiam) (not designated for publication) (Yeary, J, concurring) (same).
The doctrine of laches ought to be considered in a case like this one. Applicant's trial occurred in 2013, but this application was not filed until almost seven years later. In addition, the record is silent with regard to circumstances that may excuse Applicant's delay.
Consistent with this Court's precedent, the trial court may, sua sponte, give Applicant the opportunity to explain the reasons for the delay. It may also give the State and/or former counsel for Applicant an opportunity to state whether Applicant's delay has caused any prejudice to their ability to defend against Applicant's claims. And ultimately, the trial court may include findings of fact and conclusions of law concerning the doctrine of laches in its response to this Court's remand order.
With these additional thoughts, I join the Court's order.