SANTANA, ROJELIO ROCKY Jr.
This text of SANTANA, ROJELIO ROCKY Jr. (SANTANA, ROJELIO ROCKY Jr.) 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-88,387-01
EX PARTE ROJELIO ROCKY SANTANA, JR., Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 19233-B IN THE 104TH DISTRICT COURT FROM TAYLOR 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 robbery and
sentenced to thirty years’ imprisonment. The Eleventh Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction.
Santana v. State, No. 11-15-00010-CR (Tex. App.—Eastland Feb. 2, 2017) (not designated for
publication).
Applicant contends, among other things, that trial counsel failed to inform him of the
deadline for accepting a plea offer of fifteen years.
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 2
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 the above claim. The trial court may use any means set out in
TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d).
If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent.
If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an
attorney to represent him 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 State
made a plea offer of fifteen years, counsel was deficient not informing Applicant of the deadline for
accepting the plea offer, Applicant would have accepted the offer, and the plea would have been
entered without the State withdrawing the offer and trial court rejecting it. See Missouri v. Frye, 566
U.S. 134, 135 (2012). 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: May 23, 2018 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
SANTANA, ROJELIO ROCKY Jr., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santana-rojelio-rocky-jr-texcrimapp-2018.