Samuel Aguilar v. State

FILE COPY SIIARON KELLER ABEL ACOSTA PR¡SIDÌNG JUDGE CounT oF CRIMTNAL APPEALS CLER( (5t2)463-r55r P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION LA}YRINCE MEYERS TOM PRICE AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 SIÁNSCHILHAB PAUL \{OM,{CK GENERAL COUNSEL CHERYL JOHNSON, (5 l2) 4ó3,r 600 MIKE KEASLER BARBAR.A. P. HDRYEY CATHYCOCHR.AN ELSA ALCALA. JUDGES August 20, 2014 i30th District Court Presiding Judge SAMUELAGUILAR 1700 7th St, Rm 317 Coffreld Unit - TDC # 1631736 Bay City,TX77414-5034 2661Fltl2054 Tennessee Colony, TX 75884 Re: AGIIILAR, SAMUEL CCÀ No. WR-81,758-01 COA No. 13-10-00273-CR Trial Court Case No. 09-253-A The cou¡t has issued an opinion on the above referenced cause numbe¡. cc: District Attorney Matagorda County (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) District Clerk Matagorda County (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) 13th Court Of Appeals Clerk (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) IN FILEÞ THE 13TH COURf OFAPPEALS coRPUS CHRlSll AUG 2 0 20t4 SurR¡ME CoURT ButLDrNG,20 t wEsr l4TH STR-EET, RooM 106, AusrrN, TExAs 7g70l .WEBSITE WWW,CCÀ.COURTS,STATE.TX.US IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS IN lHE Ft¡_Et) 13TH COURTOFAÞPFÀI NO. WR-81.758-0r CORPUS CHRISTI C AUG 20 2014 EX PARTE SAMUEL AGUILAR, Applicant fur;A/^- l'?ruJlt^ ,éreex J ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEÄS CORPUS CAUSE NO. O9-253-A IN THE 13OTH DISTRICT COURT FROM MATAGORDA COUNTY Per curiam. OPINION Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 ofthe Texas code of criminal procedure, the clerk ofthe trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ ofhabeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 s.w.2d 824, 826 (Tex. crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals affi¡med his convi ction. Aguilar v. State,No. 13-10-00273-CR (Tex. App.-{orpus Ch¡isti 2011, no pet.). Applicant contends that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance because she failed to timelynotiff him that his conviction had been affirmed and failed to advise him ofhis right to petition pro se for discretionary review. The trial court found that Applicant was not advised ofhis right to frle a pro se petilion for 2 discretionary review (PDR). It recommended that we grant Applicant an out-of-time pDR We agree. Ex parte ll¡ilson,956 S.W.2d25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). We find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of{ime pDR ofthejudgment ofthe Thi¡teenth court ofAppeals in cause number 13- 10-00273-cR that affirmed his conviction in cause number 09-253 from the l30th District court of Matagorda counly. Applicant shall file his PDR with this court within 30 days of the date on which this court's mandate issues. Delivered: August 20, 2014 Do not publish