Akerson, Ex Parte Roger Merryl

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Akerson, Ex Parte Roger Merryl

DecidedJuly 28, 2004

DocketAP-74,974

StatusPublished

This text of Akerson, Ex Parte Roger Merryl (Akerson, Ex Parte Roger Merryl) 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

Akerson, Ex Parte Roger Merryl, (Tex. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. 74,974 EX PARTE ROGER MERRYL AKERSON, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

FROM LIBERTY COUNTY

Per Curiam.

O P I N I O N

This is a post-conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus forwarded to this Court pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07. Applicant was convicted of one count of aggravated sexual assault of a child and one count of indecency with a child, and punishment was assessed at imprisonment for 75 years and 20 years, respectively. Applicant appealed, and his convictions were affirmed. Akerson v. State, No. 09-97-101-CR (Tex. App. -- Beaumont, delivered June 17, 1998, no pet.).

Applicant contends, inter alia, that he was denied an opportunity to file a petition for discretionary review because his appellate attorney did not timely notify him that his convictions had been affirmed or that he could seek discretionary review. The trial court, based upon an affidavit from appellate counsel, recommended that relief be granted. The record supports that recommendation.

Habeas corpus relief is granted, in part, and Applicant is granted leave to file an out-of-time petition for discretionary review from his conviction in cause number 21,455 from the 253rd Judicial District Court of Liberty County. Applicant is ordered returned to the point at which he can file a meaningful petition for discretionary review. For purposes of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, all time limits shall be calculated as if the Court of Appeals' decision had been rendered on the day the mandate of this Court issues. We hold that should Applicant desire to seek discretionary review, he must take affirmative steps to see that his petition is filed in the Court of Appeals within thirty days of the date the mandate of this Court has issued.

Applicant's remaining claims are dismissed. See Ex parte Torres, 943 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).

DELIVERED: July 28, 2004

DO NOT PUBLISH

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

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. 74,974 EX PARTE ROGER MERRYL AKERSON, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

FROM LIBERTY COUNTY

Per Curiam.

O P I N I O N

This is a post-conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus forwarded to this Court pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07. Applicant was convicted of one count of aggravated sexual assault of a child and one count of indecency with a child, and punishment was assessed at imprisonment for 75 years and 20 years, respectively. Applicant appealed, and his convictions were affirmed. Akerson v. State, No. 09-97-101-CR (Tex. App. -- Beaumont, delivered June 17, 1998, no pet.).

Applicant contends, inter alia, that he was denied an opportunity to file a petition for discretionary review because his appellate attorney did not timely notify him that his convictions had been affirmed or that he could seek discretionary review. The trial court, based upon an affidavit from appellate counsel, recommended that relief be granted. The record supports that recommendation.

Habeas corpus relief is granted, in part, and Applicant is granted leave to file an out-of-time petition for discretionary review from his conviction in cause number 21,455 from the 253rd Judicial District Court of Liberty County. Applicant is ordered returned to the point at which he can file a meaningful petition for discretionary review. For purposes of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, all time limits shall be calculated as if the Court of Appeals' decision had been rendered on the day the mandate of this Court issues. We hold that should Applicant desire to seek discretionary review, he must take affirmative steps to see that his petition is filed in the Court of Appeals within thirty days of the date the mandate of this Court has issued.

Applicant's remaining claims are dismissed. See Ex parte Torres, 943 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).

DELIVERED: July 28, 2004

DO NOT PUBLISH

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Akerson, Ex Parte Roger Merryl, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akerson-ex-parte-roger-merryl-texcrimapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack