Opinion
NO. WR-84,922-05 NO. WR-84,922-06 NO. WR-84,922-07 NO. WR-84,922-08 NO. WR-84,922-09 NO. WR-84,922-10 NO. WR-84,922-11 NO. WR-84,922-12
06-15-2016
EX PARTE LENDALL NOEL MORGAN, Applicant
ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NOS. 6907W & 6860W & 6861W & 6862W & 6863W & 6864W & 6865W & 6859W IN THE 8TH DISTRICT COURT FROM DELTA COUNTY
Per curiam. ALCALA, J., filed a concurring opinion in which JOHNSON, J. joined. YEARY, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which KEASLER and HERVEY, JJ., joined. 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 these applications for writs of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of two counts of sexual assault of a child and eight counts of delivery of a controlled substance to a minor and sentenced to fifteen years' imprisonment for each count, to run concurrently. He did not appeal his convictions.
TDCJ records reflect that Applicant was convicted of two counts sexual assault of a child in cause numbers 6857 and 6907. This Court has only received an application challenging cause number 6907. TDCJ records also reflect that Applicant was convicted of eight counts of delivery of a controlled substance to a minor. This Court has not received an application challenging cause number 6858. --------
Applicant contends that his sentences are improper because he was sentenced multiple times, in multiple counties, for one criminal act. Specifically, he alleges that his convictions for delivery of a controlled substance to a minor are all based on a single act. Applicant also contends that he was convicted of the same offenses of sexual assault of a child and delivery of a controlled substance to a minor in three different counties.
Applicant also contends that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because counsel failed to challenge the State's evidence, failed to object to double jeopardy violations, and failed to object to jurisdictional defects in the indictments.
Applicant also contends that his pleas were involuntary because these pleas were entered into with the understanding that all remaining charges would be dismissed. However, Applicant alleges that, after being convicted and sent to TDCJ, he was bench warranted back to face the same charges in Hunt County.
Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle to relief. 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).
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 in regard to Applicant's claim that his convictions violate double jeopardy. The trial court shall also make findings as to whether the performance of Applicant's attorney was deficient and, if so, whether counsel's deficient performance prejudiced Applicant. The trial court shall also make findings of fact and conclusions of law in regard to Applicant's claim that his pleas were involuntary. The trial court shall also make findings as to whether the State is prejudiced by Applicant's delay in presenting this claim under the doctrine of laches. 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 claims for habeas corpus relief.
These applications 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 shall be obtained from this Court. Filed: June 15, 2016
Do not publish