From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ex Parte Ray

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Jan 18, 2006
No. WR-63,299-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 18, 2006)

Opinion

No. WR-63,299-01

January 18, 2006. DO NOT PUBLISH.

On Application for a writ of Habeas Corpus in Cause No. CR-05-076 in the Fourth District Court from Rusk County.


ORDER


This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus which was transmitted to this Court pursuant to the provisions of Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07. Applicant was convicted of the offense of burglary of a habitation and was sentenced to confinement for five years. No direct appeal was taken. Applicant contends that his plea agreement was violated. Specifically, Applicant contends that as part of his plea the trial court agreed that he would serve his sentence in a drug rehabilitation program. The trial court has not entered findings of fact or conclusions of law. We believe that Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Therefore, it is this Court's opinion that additional facts need to be developed and because this Court cannot hear evidence, the trial court is the appropriate forum. The trial court may resolve those issues as set out in Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, § 3 (d), in that it shall order affidavits, depositions, or interrogatories from counsel or prosecution, or it may order a hearing. In the appropriate case the trial court may also rely on its personal recollection. If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, the court shall first decide whether Applicant is indigent. If the trial court finds that Applicant is indigent and Applicant desires to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall then, pursuant to the provisions of Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 26.04, appoint an attorney to represent him at the hearing. Following receipt of additional information, the trial court shall make findings of fact as to whether Applicant's plea agreement included a representation by the trial court that Applicant would serve his sentence in a drug rehabilitation program. The trial court shall also make any further findings of fact and conclusions of law it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of the application for writ of habeas corpus. Because this Court does not hear evidence, Ex Parte Rodriquez, 334 S.W.2d 294 (Tex.Crim.App. 1960), this application for a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus will be held in abeyance pending the trial court's compliance with this order. Resolution of the issues shall be accomplished by the trial court within 90 days of the date 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 returned to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.

In the event any continuances are granted, copies of the order granting the continuance should be provided to this Court.

Any extensions of this time period should be obtained from this Court.


Summaries of

Ex Parte Ray

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Jan 18, 2006
No. WR-63,299-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 18, 2006)
Case details for

Ex Parte Ray

Case Details

Full title:EX PARTE GAYLON HAROLD RAY, Applicant

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Jan 18, 2006

Citations

No. WR-63,299-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 18, 2006)