Linville, Elisha
This text of Linville, Elisha (Linville, Elisha) 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.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-87,020-02
EX PARTE ELISHA LINVILLE, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 39,010-B IN THE 66TH DISTRICT COURT FROM HILL 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 aggravated
assault of a family member and sentenced to fifty years’ imprisonment. The Sixth Court of Appeals
affirmed his conviction. Linville v. State, No. 06-16-00055-CR (Tex. App. — Texarkana, Aug. 18,
2016) (not designated for publication).
Applicant contends, among other things,1 that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance
1 This Court has reviewed Applicant’s other claims and finds them to be without merit. 2
because trial counsel failed to interview and call witnesses to support Applicant’s theory of the
defense, introduced or stipulated to a paramedics’ report that contained testimonial hearsay in
violation of Applicant’s right to confrontation, and failed to object when the State introduced the
garden rake that was allegedly used as a deadly weapon despite a deficient chain of custody and the
fact that the condition of the rake had been materially altered since the time of the offense.
Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,
466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these
circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294
(Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court
shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Specifically, trial counsel shall state whether Applicant advised him of the existence of potential
witnesses Caroline Johnson, Glen Adair and Bennie Baptisto prior to trial, and if so, whether trial
counsel attempted to interview or call such witnesses to testify at trial. Trial counsel shall state
whether the report of the Careflite paramedics was introduced by the State or the defense, and shall
state whether that report contained testimonial hearsay from witnesses who were not available for
cross-examination. Trial counsel shall state whether he was aware prior to trial that the State
planned to introduce the garden rake that was alleged to have been used by Applicant as a deadly
weapon. Trial counsel shall state whether he objected to the admission of the rake on the basis of
its changed condition or on the basis that the State did not prove a sufficient chain of custody, and
if not, why not. The trial court may use any means set out in TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, §
3(d). In the appropriate case, the trial court may rely on its personal recollection. Id.
If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. 3
If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an
attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 26.04.
The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether the
performance of Applicant’s trial counsel was deficient and, if so, whether counsel’s deficient
performance prejudiced Applicant. The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and
conclusions of law that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant’s claim for
habeas corpus relief.
This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The
issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all
affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or
deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall
be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time must
be requested by the trial court and shall be obtained from this Court.
Filed: June 12, 2019 Do not publish
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Linville, Elisha, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linville-elisha-texcrimapp-2019.