Opinion
WR-34,095-30
07-26-2023
EX PARTE ANTONIO SEPEDA, Applicant
Do not publish
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 1777210-A IN THE 180TH DISTRICT COURT FROM HARRIS COUNTY
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Applicant pleaded guilty to evading arrest or detention in exchange for a sentence of seven 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.
In two grounds for review, Applicant alleges that the trial court failed to properly credit him with pre-sentencing jail time, and that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to insure that the correct amount of pre-sentencing jail time credit was reflected on the judgment. On April 26, 2023, the trial court entered a judgment nunc pro tunc granting Applicant 242 days of pre-sentencing jail time credit. Applicant's claim that the trial court failed to grant him the proper credit for pre-sentencing jail time is dismissed. Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (Where an inmate seeks pre-sentence jail time credit, "[t]he appropriate remedy in this situation is to require Applicant to present the issue to the trial court by way of a nunc pro tunc motion, . . . [and] [i]f the trial court fails to respond, Applicant is first required to seek relief in the Court of Appeals, by way of a petition for a writ of mandamus, unless there is a compelling reason not to do ."). Applicant's ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim is without merit, and is denied.