State v. Eric Michael Heilman
This text of State v. Eric Michael Heilman (State v. Eric Michael Heilman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of 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 Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont ________________
NO. 09-12-00505-CR ________________
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant
V.
ERIC MICHAEL HEILMAN, Appellee ____________________________________________________________________
On Appeal from the County Court No. 2 Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. 285580 ____________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The trial court granted habeas corpus relief to Eric Michael Heilman. State v.
Heilman, 413 S.W.3d 503, 505 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2013), rev’d, Ex parte
Heilman, 456 S.W.3d 159 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015). Heilman’s application for writ
of habeas corpus asserted that his plea was involuntary and he had received
ineffective assistance of counsel. Id. Before the hearing on Heilman’s application,
the habeas court requested briefs from the parties on the issue of whether the
prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations. Id. at 506. The trial court’s
1 order stated that the basis for granting habeas relief was the trial court’s
determination that Heilman’s prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations.
Id. The State appealed, and this Court affirmed the trial court’s order. Id. at 509.
The Court of Criminal Appeals granted the State’s petition for discretionary review
and held that Heilman’s limitations defense was a forfeitable right and Heilman
had waived his right to assert a limitations defense, and the Court remanded the
case “to the court of appeals to assess Heilman’s other claims.” Ex parte Heilman,
456 S.W.3d at 160, 169.
After the Court of Criminal Appeals remanded the case to this Court, we
gave the parties an opportunity to raise additional arguments, and the parties
declined to do so. The trial court has not yet addressed Heilman’s remaining
claims. In accordance with the mandate from the Court of Criminal Appeals, we
remand the cause to the trial court.
REMANDED.
________________________________ LEANNE JOHNSON Justice
Submitted on May 27, 2015 Opinion Delivered June 24, 2015
Before Kreger, Horton, and Johnson, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Eric Michael Heilman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-eric-michael-heilman-texapp-2015.