IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NOS. WR-84,059-03 AND WR-84,059-04
EX PARTE TRAVIS PRUNTY, Applicant
ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NOS. 11CR-116-1 AND 11CR-113-1 IN THE 349TH DISTRICT COURT
FROM HOUSTON 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 pleaded guilty to two charges of
assault on a public servant and was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment for each charge, to run
concurrently with each other. He did not appeal his convictions.
Applicant contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because trial counsel
failed to investigate, failed to seek out and interview a witness who had expressed a willingness to
testify on Applicant’s behalf, and tricked Applicant into pleading guilty by telling him erroneously
that the original trial judge had removed himself from the case and that it would be in Applicant’s
2
best interest to plead guilty because the new judge would be harder on him. Applicant alleges that
his cases were set for trial, but that he was brought to plead guilty a week early “behind the back”
of the original trial judge.
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 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.
Because Applicant's convictions in these cases were final in 2012, but he did not file these
applications until more than five years later, there is a possibility that Applicant's claims may be
precluded by laches. However, because the record is silent on the circumstances that may excuse
this substantial delay, we reserve judgment as to whether laches bars Applicant's request for relief
until he is given an opportunity to explain his delayed applications. See Ex parte Smith, 444 S.W.3d
661 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). The trial court shall provide Applicant with the opportunity to explain
his delay in seeking habeas relief, and thereafter the trial court shall make findings of fact and
conclusions of law as to whether Applicant's claims should be barred by laches. The trial court shall
make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether the performance of Applicant's counsel
was deficient and, if so, whether counsel's deficient performance prejudiced Applicant. The trial
3
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.
These applications 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 must
be requested by the trial court and shall be obtained from this Court.
Filed: June 13, 2018
Do not publish