Henderson, Billy Ray

















IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS




NO. WR-64,980-01


EX PARTE BILLY RAY HENDERSON, Applicant


ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. W03-34709-W IN THE 363rd DISTRICT COURT

FROM DALLAS COUNTY


Per curiam.

O R D E R



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 writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of delivery of a controlled substance and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Henderson v. State, No. 06-03-00221-CR (Tex. App.-Texarkana, delivered July 1, 2004, no pet.).

Applicant contends that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance because before he was permitted to withdraw as appellate counsel, he failed to inform applicant of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. See Ex Parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). In addition, applicant contends that he was not able review the trial record in his case when he prepared his pro se brief on direct appeal because he had been transferred to Dallas County pursuant to a bench warrant. As a result, he contends that he was effectively denied his right to appeal.

Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 608 (1984); Ex parte Lemke, 13 S.W.3d 791,795-96 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). In these circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court shall provide appellate counsel with an additional opportunity to respond to applicant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal. 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 as to whether applicant was denied his right to a meaningful appeal because his appellate counsel failed to advise him of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. The trial court shall also make findings of fact as to whether applicant was not able to review the trial record in his case because he had been transferred to Dallas County pursuant to a bench warrant. 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. If any continuances are granted, a copy of the order granting the continuance shall be sent to this Court. 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. Any extensions of time shall be obtained from this Court.

Filed: July 26, 2006

DO NOT PUBLISH