Granados, Ex Parte Javier A/K/A Anaya, Ex Parte Jose Javier Granados

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

---

NO. AP-75,890

---

EX PARTE JAVIER ANAYA GRANADOS, Applicant

---

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 03-758-K277 IN THE 277th DISTRICT COURT

FROM WILLIAMSON COUNTY

---

           Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

            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 writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault and sentenced to ninety-nine years’ imprisonment. The Third Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Granados v. State, No. 03-04-00399-CR (Tex. App.–Austin, delivered July 6, 2005, no pet.).

            Applicant contends that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance because counsel failed to timely notify Applicant that his conviction had been affirmed and failed to advise him of his right to petition for discretionary review pro se.

            Appellate counsel filed an affidavit with the trial court. Based on that affidavit and other exhibits included in the record, the trial court has entered findings of fact and conclusions of law that appellate counsel failed to timely notify Applicant that his conviction had been affirmed and failed to advise him of his right to petition for discretionary appeal pro se. The trial court recommends that relief be granted. Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). We find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition for discretionary review of the judgment of the Third Court of Appeals in Cause No. 03-04-00399-CR that affirmed his conviction in Case No. 03-758-K277 from the 277th Judicial District Court of Williamson County. Applicant shall file his petition for discretionary review with the Third Court of Appeals within 30 days of the date on which this Court’s mandate issues.

Delivered:       April 9, 2008

Do not publish