Agnew, Nicky Charune

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 12, 2018
DocketWR-44,581-02
StatusPublished

This text of Agnew, Nicky Charune (Agnew, Nicky Charune) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Agnew, Nicky Charune, (Tex. 2018).

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-44,581-02

EX PARTE NICKY CHARUNE AGNEW, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 007-1194-11-A IN THE 7TH DISTRICT COURT FROM SMITH 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 the offense of

possession of a controlled substance and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

Applicant complains that: appellate counsel was ineffective regarding a motion for rehearing;

trial counsel was ineffective for abandoning a meritorious suppression argument; trial counsel was

ineffective for failing to object to testimony from a DEA agent; trial counsel was ineffective for

failing to object to testimony regarding cocaine addicts; and trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to closing argument. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).

We order that this application be filed and set for submission on Applicant’s claim of

ineffective assistance of appellate counsel to determine whether the State Trooper who stopped

Applicant for a traffic violation had reasonable suspicion to continue Applicant’s detention after the

purpose for the traffic-stop had ended, whether the drug-evidence discovered after a canine-assisted

search should have been suppressed, and whether appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to

properly raise the issue before the appellate court. The parties shall brief these issues. This Court

has independently reviewed Applicant’s remaining claims, and habeas relief as to them is denied.

It appears that Applicant is represented by counsel. If that is not correct, the trial court shall

determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and desires to be represented by

counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to represent Applicant. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art

26.04. The trial court shall send to this Court, within 60 days of the date of this order, a

supplemental transcript containing: a confirmation that Applicant is represented by counsel; the

order appointing counsel; or a statement that Applicant is not indigent. All briefs shall be filed with

this Court within 90 days of the date of this order.

Filed: September 12, 2018 Do not publish

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
Ex Parte Young
418 S.W.2d 824 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Agnew, Nicky Charune, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/agnew-nicky-charune-texcrimapp-2018.