Ex Parte Brian Stanley Granados

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided December 30, 2014·No. 03-14-00288-CR·Published

Opinion

ACCEPTED 03-14-00288-CR 3617278 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/30/2014 2:18:31 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE CLERK CAUSE NO. 03-14-00288-CR

*********************************** FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 12/30/2014 2:18:31 PM IN THE COURT OF APPEALS JEFFREY D. KYLE FOR THE Clerk THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS

***********************************

Ex parte BRIAN STANLEY GRANADOS, Appellant V.

STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

**********************************

Appeal From the 22nd Judicial District Court Cause No. CR-11-0311-A Hays County, Texas

STATE'S BRIEF ***********************************

Angie D. Roberts-Huckaby Asst. Criminal District Attorney Hays County Justice Center 712 South Stagecoach TraO, Ste. 2057 San Marcos, Texas, 78666 512-393-7600 Angie.roberts@co.hays.tx.us State Bar No. 24081797 Attorney for the State of Texas

Oral Argument Not Requested NAMES OF PARTIES

Appellant: Brian Stanley Granados

Attorneys for Sherri K. Tibbe, Criminal District Attorney the State: Hays County Government Center 712 South Stagecoach Trail, Ste. 2057 San Marcos, Texas 78666

At trial: John Couch, ADA

On appeal: Angie D. Roberts-Huckaby, ADA

Attorneys for Appellant:

At trial: Leonard Martinez 812 San Antonio, Suite 104 Austin, Texas 78701

On appeal: Leonard Martinez 812 San Antonio, Suite 104 Austin, Texas 78701

Trial Judge Hon. Jack Robison TABLE OF CONTENTS

NAMES OF PARTIES i

TABLE OF CONTENTS ii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES iii

ISSUES PRESENTED 1

STATEMENT OF THE CASE 1

STATEMENT OF FACTS 3

L To prevail on a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus, the applicant bears

the burden of proof that the facts entitle him to relief and the trial court, as the

fact-fmder, is the exclusive judge of witness credibility 3

CONCLUSION & PRAYER 6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 7

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 7

APPENDIX A : 8

n TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Federal Cases

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) 7

State Cases

State V. Guerrero, 400 S.W.3d 576 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) 7

State Statutes

Tex. R. Civ. P. 1.02 (a)(3) 9

111 ISSUES PRESENTED

To prevail on a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus, the applicant bears the

burden of proof that the facts entitle him to relief; the trial court, as the fact-finder,

is the exclusive judge of witness credibility. Here, Granados himself gave the sole

testimony supporting his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel and failed to

call trial counsel to testify. Did the trial court abuse its discretion by denying the

post-conviction writ of habeas corpus when the trial court is the exclusive judge of

credibility?

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Brian Stanley Granados ("Granados") was indicted for the offense of

Possession of Marijuana-fifty pounds or less but more than five pounds, a third

degree felony, on April 14, 2011.^ Granados signed a plea bargain agreement that

probated two years of confinement in TDCJ to five years of community

supervision, a fine and fees, treatment and counseling, and 200 hours of

^(CR 4). community service restitution.^ On September 29, 2011, Granados waived his right

to appeal as part of the plea bargain agreement.^ Granados was convicted and sentenced to the terms set forth in the plea bargain agreement."^ On October 11, 2012, the State filed a Motion to Revoke Community Supervision and Impose

Sentence against Granados for violating the terms and conditions of his community

supervision.^

Granados filed for Writ of Habeas Corpus on January 7, 2014 and the State

responded on March 11, 2014.^ The court recommended denying the writ on March 13, 2014.^ On April 23, 2014, Granados filed a Notice of Appeal.^ The

Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, at Austin handed down an order and

memorandum opinion regarding Granados's appeal and the appeal was abated.^

The State filed Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, which the trial

court adopted on May 27, 2014, denying the application for Writ of Habeas

Corpus.

^(CR 5). ^(CR 12). "^(CR 13-14). ^(CR 15-17). ^(CR 18-27). ^(CR 39). ^(CR 43). ^(CR 49-50). (CR 59-63). STATEMENT OF FACTS

During the period of said community supervision, Granados violated the

terms and conditions of his community supervision by testing positive for

marijuana twice, failing to report to his supervision officer twice, and failing to

complete other terms and conditions.^^ The State filed a Motion to Revoke Community Supervision and Impose Sentence as a result of the failed terms and

conditions/^ Granados filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus, alleging that his plea was

not entered knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily as a result of the ineffective

assistance of counsel/^

I. To prevail on a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus, the applicant bears the burden of proof that the facts entitle him to relief and the trial court, as the fact-finder, is the exclusive judge of witness credibility.

Granados attacks the validity of his prior guilty plea as reflected in the written

judgment claiming ineffective assistance of counsel;'"^ however, he cannot

overcome the presumption that the plea recitals written in the judgment are

(CR 15-17). (CR 15-17). (CR18). ''^Granados did not overcome the strong presumption that, "trial counsel's actions fell within [a] wide range of reasonable professional assistance." Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984). He simply did not show sufficient evidence that trial counsel's performance was defective. He did not prove the two-step Strickland test. The test requires a two-step analysis: 1) Did the attorney's representation fall below an objective standard of reasonableness under prevailing professional norms? 2) If so, is there a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result would have been different? 3 correct.'^ Written recitals "are binding in the absence of direct proof of their

falsity."''

In an Article 11.072 habeas proceeding, the trial judge is the sole finder of

fact.'^ Appellate courts afford almost total deference to a trial court's factual

findings when supported by the record, especially when those findings are based

upon credibility and demeanor.'^

At the writ hearing, the only witness called was Granados. The only evidence

presented supporting his allegation was his own testimony. Trial counsel's

affidavit discredits his allegations.'^ Trial counsel had lengthy and extensive

conversations with Granados regarding the case.'^ The court has the discretion to believe or disbelieve Granados's testimony; therefore, it was within the court's

discretion to not believe his testimony and base its ruling that trial counsel was not

ineffective on the affidavit submitted by trial counsel.

Granados also complains that trial counsel did not; conduct a proper and

independent investigation, challenge the evidence in the case, or provide

meaningful plea negotiations based on the lack of evidence supporting Granados's

State V. Guerrero, 400 S.W.3d 576

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

Ex Parte Brian Stanley Granados, (Tex. Ct. App. 2014).

Ex Parte Brian Stanley Granados (Ex Parte Brian Stanley Granados) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
State of Texas v. Guerrero, Ex Parte Marcelino
400 S.W.3d 576 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2013)