IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-93,638-01
EX PARTE CHARLES HARRIS, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. 11-0559-CR-A IN THE 274TH DISTRICT COURT
FROM GUADALUPE COUNTY
Per curiam. YEARY , J. filed a concurring opinion which SLAUGHTER , J. joined.
ORDER
Applicant was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life imprisonment without
parole. The Fourth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Harris v. State, 04-12-00843-CR
(Tex. App.—San Antonio March 19, 2014)(not designated for publication). Applicant filed this
application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded
it to this Court. See TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07.
Applicant contends, among other things, that trial counsel was ineffective by failing to
adequately investigate and challenge two witnesses’ changing stories, failing to object to extraneous
offense testimony regarding Applicant’s drug use, failing to inform the judge of the State’s non-
response to a discovery request, failing to use prior statements to impeach State’s witnesses
2
Singletary and Giles, failing to object to hearsay, failing to object to opinion regarding the veracity
of certain information given to police, failing to object to the court’s erroneous instruction on
culpable mental state for capital murder and to the exclusion of the accomplice-witness instruction,
and failing to object to improper jury argument. Applicant contends that appellate counsel was
ineffective for failing to raise the issues of ineffective trial counsel and the trial court’s denial of
Applicant’s right to represent himself at trial. Applicant also contends that a State’s witness testified
falsely that he was not receiving a benefit from his testimony against Applicant when he was.
Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,
466 U.S. 668 (1984). Accordingly, the record should be developed. The trial court is the appropriate
forum for findings of fact. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court shall order
both trial and appellate counsel to respond to Applicant’s claims. In developing the record, the trial
court may use any means set out in Article 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 wants to be represented
by counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to represent him at the hearing. See TEX . CODE
CRIM . PROC. art. 26.04. If counsel is appointed or retained, the trial court shall immediately notify
this Court of counsel’s name.
The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether trial counsel’s
performance was deficient and Applicant was prejudiced. The trial court shall make findings of fact
and conclusions of law as to whether appellate counsel’s performance was deficient and Applicant
was prejudiced. The trial court shall make findings as to whether any of the State’s witnesses
received benefit from their testimony and if so, whether they testified falsely when asked if they were
receiving benefit for their testimony. The trial court may make any other findings and conclusions
3
that it deems appropriate in response to Applicant’s claims.
The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from
the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s
findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,
affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from
hearings and depositions. See TEX . R. APP . P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested
by the trial court and obtained from this Court.
Filed: May 11, 2022
Do not publish