IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-82,366-02
EX PARTE OSCAR MARIO NAVARRO JR. , Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. 12-07-13541-CRSI IN THE 79TH DISTRICT COURT
FROM JIM WELLS 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 possession of a
controlled substance and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. His appeal was dismissed for want
of jurisdiction. Navarro v. State, No. 04-14-00503-CR (Tex. App.—San Antonio Jul. 30, 2014) (not
designated for publication).
Applicant contends, among other things, that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance
because counsel did not properly advise him of the appellate process and protect his right to appeal.
2
The same ground was raised in Applicant’s first writ application, which was dismissed as
prematurely filed. Ex parte Navarro, No. WR-82,366-02 (Tex. Crim. App. Nov. 19, 2014) (not
designated for publication). Counsel responded to the claim in the first writ application by way of
affidavit and the habeas court made findings recommending denial of relief, determining that
Applicant did not timely inform counsel of his desire to appeal. The response and findings do not
address how Applicant was advised as to his rights to appellate counsel and the deadlines for
perfecting appeal.
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); Ex parte
Axel, 757 S.W.2d 369 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). 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 counsel to prepare a
supplemental response to Applicant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court may
use any means set out in TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d).
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 additional findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether
Applicant was denied his right to a meaningful appeal because Applicant’s counsel failed to fully
advise him about the appellate process. The trial court shall make specific findings addressing
whether Applicant was advised that he had a right to appointed counsel if he was indigent, and
whether he was properly advised as to the applicable deadlines for perfecting appeal. The trial court
3
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 14, 2015
Do not publish