Schibi, Michael Gregory
This text of Schibi, Michael Gregory (Schibi, Michael Gregory) 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-93,551-01
EX PARTE MICHAEL GREGORY SCHIBI, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 10841-D (1) IN THE 350TH DISTRICT COURT FROM TAYLOR COUNTY
Per curiam.
ORDER
Applicant pleaded guilty to aggravated assault family violence and placed on deferred
adjudication community supervision for seven years. Applicant’s community supervision was later
revoked and he was sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment. The Eleventh Court of Appeals
dismissed his appeal for want of jurisdiction. Schibi v. Texas, No. 11-19-00325-CR (Tex. App. —
Eastland, Oct. 28, 2021). Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county
of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art.
11.07.
Applicant contends that his plea was involuntary because both the trial court and his trial
counsel improperly admonished Applicant that his charge was for a first-degree felony when, in fact, 2
it was a second-degree felony offense. Based on the record, the trial court has determined that the
trial court incorrectly admonished Applicant on the applicable punishment range for a first-degree
felony and that trial counsel incorrectly advised Applicant to plead guilty to a first-degree felony
when he had only been charged with a second-degree felony. However, there is no response from
trial counsel in the record.
Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S.
52 (1985); Ex parte Argent, 393 S.W.3d 781 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013); Ex parte Morrow, 952 S.W.2d
530, 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). Accordingly, the record should be developed. The trial court is
the appropriate forum for findings of fact. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court
shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim. In developing the record, the trial court
may use any means set out in Article 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 wants to be represented by
counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to represent [him/her] at the hearing. See TEX . CODE
CRIM . PROC. art. 26.04. If counsel is appointed or retained, the trial court shall immediately notify
this Court of counsel’s name.
The trial court shall make additional findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether
trial counsel was ineffective. The trial court may make any other findings and conclusions that it
deems appropriate in response to Applicant’s claims.
The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from
the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s
findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,
affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from 3
hearings and depositions. See TEX . R. APP. P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested
by the trial court and obtained from this Court.
Filed: MAY 04, 2022 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
Schibi, Michael Gregory, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schibi-michael-gregory-texcrimapp-2022.