IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-81,430-02
EX PARTE JAMARIOS LECHRISTOPHER CANTON, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. F1017409 IN THE 145TH DISTRICT COURT
FROM NACOGDOCHES COUNTY
Per curiam.
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 this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte
Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated
assault and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Twelfth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction.
Canton v. State, No. 12-12-00118-CR (Tex. App. – Tyler, December 20, 2012).
Applicant contends, among other things,1 that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance
because counsel failed to object to a defect in the indictment, failed to object to incorrect definitions
1
This Court has reviewed Applicant’s other claims and finds them to be without merit.
2
of “reasonable doubt,” failed to object to irrelevant testimony, failed to file a motion to suppress
evidence or object to the State’s failure to establish a chain of custody for the evidence, failed to
object to improper statements by the prosecutor during closing arguments at both the guilt/innocence
and punishment stages of trial, and called a witness whose testimony was entirely unfavorable to the
defense. Applicant also alleges that, because he placed it in the prison mail system before the date
upon which it was due to be filed, his pro se petition for discretionary review was improperly
dismissed as untimely.
Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,
466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). 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 claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The
trial court shall also obtain an affidavit from the supervisor of the mail room on the unit in which
Applicant was held during the applicable period, stating the date upon which Applicant’s pro se
petition for discretionary review was placed into the prison mail system, whether it was properly
addressed to the clerk of this Court, and the date upon which it was sent to this Court. 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 and conclusions of law as to the date upon which
3
Applicant’s pro se petition for discretionary review was placed into the prison mail system, and as
to why this Court did not receive the petition until April 5, 2013. The trial court shall also make
findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether the performance of Applicant’s trial counsel
was deficient and, if so, whether counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced Applicant. 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. 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: October 8, 2014
Do not publish