Whitmore, Timothy Gene

















IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS




NOS. WR-78,779-01 & WR-78,779-02


EX PARTE TIMOTHY GENE WHITMORE, Applicant






ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NOS. 53821-336 & 53822-336

IN THE 336TH CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT

FROM GRAYSON 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 these applications for writs of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated assault in both cause numbers. He was sentenced to fifteen years' imprisonment in cause number 53821-336 and twenty years' imprisonment in cause number 53822-336. The Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction in cause number 53822-336. Whitmore v. State, No. 05-07-00292-CR (Tex. App.-Dallas November 8, 2007). He did not appeal his conviction in cause number 53821-336.

Applicant contends that his convictions violate double jeopardy, that the cumulation order in cause number 53821-336 is invalid, and that his counsel was ineffective. Applicant was convicted in these two cause numbers, and also in two intoxication assault cause numbers as well. He did not file applications attacking his convictions for the intoxication assault convictions.

On the 5th day of December, 2012, the trial court signed findings of fact and conclusions of law stating that there is no double jeopardy violation as to these two convictions for aggravated assault because the offenses were committed against two different complainants. This is a correct statement of law, but it appears that Applicant is complaining not of a double jeopardy violation between the aggravated assault convictions, but rather with the intoxication assault convictions. However, if Applicant wishes to attack the intoxication assault convictions, he must file separate applications for those cause numbers.

Based on the trial court's findings of fact as well as this Court's independent review of the entire record, we deny relief.





Filed: January 9, 2013

Do not publish