Speckman, Steve Herbert
This text of Speckman, Steve Herbert (Speckman, Steve Herbert) 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-81,947-02
EX PARTE STEVE HERBERT SPECKMAN, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. C-372-010662-0861282-A IN THE 372ND DISTRICT COURT FROM TARRANT COUNTY
Per curiam.
OPINION
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 pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual
assault and was sentenced to thirty years’ imprisonment. The Seventh Court of Appeals affirmed his
conviction. Speckman v. State, No. 07-13-00232-CR (Tex. App.—Amarillo May 23, 2014) (not
designated for publication).
Applicant contends, among other things, that trial counsel rendered his guilty plea
involuntary. After the trial court ordered an affidavit from counsel, adopted the State’s proposed
findings of fact and conclusions of law, and recommended that we deny relief, Applicant filed a 2
motion in this Court to dismiss his application. We filed and set his case for submission, ultimately
denied his motion to dismiss, and granted his motion to stay the proceedings so that he could amend
his application. Ex parte Speckman, 537 S.W.3d 49 (Tex. Crim. App. 2017); Ex parte Speckman,
No. WR-81,947-02 (Tex. Crim. App. Dec. 6, 2017) (not designated for publication).
After Applicant filed amended applications on April 5 and 10, 2018, we remanded one of his
amended claims for a response from guilty-plea counsel and further findings of fact and conclusions
of law. Ex parte Speckman, No. WR-81,947-02 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 12, 2018) (not designated
for publication). On remand, counsel responded in a sworn affidavit and the trial court made further
findings of fact and concluded that counsel’s conduct was not deficient. On May 6, 2019, Applicant
then filed in this Court a motion to dismiss or stay the proceedings, noting that he had filed a
supplemental application in Tarrant County. On May 23, we received this application.
Based on the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law and this Court independent
review of the record and Applicant’s original, amended, and supplemental applications in this
proceeding, we deny relief.
Filed: September 11, 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
Speckman, Steve Herbert, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/speckman-steve-herbert-texcrimapp-2019.