IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NOS. WR-82,096-01, WR-82,096-02 & WR-82,096-03
EX PARTE KENTRAIL RAY MCCUIN, Applicant
ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NOS. F-12-51308-L, F-12-51309-L & F-12-51310-L
IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 5
FROM DALLAS COUNTY
Per curiam. YEARY , J., filed a concurring opinion, in which KEASLER and HERVEY ,
JJ., joined. JOHNSON , J., filed a dissenting statement. ALCALA , J., filed a dissenting opinion.
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 these applications for writs of habeas corpus. Ex
parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of evading
arrest, possession of a firearm by a felon, and unlawful possession with intent to deliver cocaine in
a drug free school zone. He was sentenced to two, five, and twenty years’ imprisonment,
respectively. The Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. McCuin v. State, Nos. 05-12-
01148-CR, 05-12-01149-CR & 05-12-01150-CR (Tex. App. Dallas—Jul. 26, 2013) (not designated
for publication).
2
Applicant contended, among other things, that his trial counsel rendered ineffective
assistance because he did not object to an improper cumulation order. After a remand, the trial court
found that trial counsel objected and was not ineffective. The court’s findings concerning the merits
of Applicant’s claims are supported by the record. The trial court recommended that this Court
remand the cases for new punishment hearings. However, we find no legal basis in Applicant’s
allegations to conclude he is entitled to habeas corpus relief. Ex Parte Townsend, 137 S.W.3d 79
(Tex. Crim. App. 2004). Based on the trial court’s findings and this Court’s independent review of
the entire record, we deny relief on all of Applicant’s habeas allegations.
Filed: June 22, 2016
Publish