Turner, Anthony Carl v. Texas, the State Of

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 16, 1999
Docket05-93-01826-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Turner, Anthony Carl v. Texas, the State Of (Turner, Anthony Carl v. Texas, the State Of) 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.

Bluebook
Turner, Anthony Carl v. Texas, the State Of, (Tex. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

°5- 13-l<6Zi*.'CXL

FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS

JUN 2 11999

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINALAPP^ALS OF TEXAS

NO. 73,429

EX PARTE ANTHONY CARL TURNER, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FROM DALLAS COUNTY

The opinion was delivered per curiam.

OPINION

This is a post-conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus forwarded to this

Court pursuant to Article 11.07, V.A.C.C.P. Applicant was convicted of the offense of

burglary of a vehicle, and punishment was assessed at ninety-nine years imprisonment.

This conviction was affirmed. Turner v. State. No. 05-93-01826-CR (Tex. App.—

Dallas, delivered June 5,1996, no pet.).

Applicant contends that he was denied an opportunity to file a petition for discretionary review because his appellate attorney did not timely notify him that his

conviction had been affirmed. The trial court could not determine that Applicant was

aware that his conviction had been affirmed in time to file a petition for discretionary

review and recommended that relief be granted. We agree with the trial court's

recommendation.

Habeas corpus relief is granted, and Applicant is granted leave to file an out-of- time petition for discretionary review from his conviction in cause number F93-60164- HL from the Criminal District Court Number 5 ofDallas County. Applicant is ordered

returned to the point at which he can file ameaningful petition for discretionary review. For purposes ofthe Texas Rules ofAppellate Procedure, all time limits shall be calculated as ifthe Court ofAppeals' decision had been rendered on the day the mandate ofthis Court issues. We hold that should Applicant desire to seek discretionary review, he must take affirmative steps to see that his petition is filed in the Court ofAppeals within thirty days ofthe date the mandate ofthis Court has issued.

DELIVERED: June 16, 1999 DO NOT PUBLISH .%,<•——srrr ^«5 "CO ya & ' A 0.1 POSTAGE >>~. * l[i<<' : -„,. \- ;V*| • dj ; ; / *: -"! i 0 2 6 2, Court of Criminal appeals Pox 12308 LISA ROMBOK CLERK 5TH COURT OF APPEALS Capitol Station COURTHOUSE 60 0 COMMERCE 2ND FLOOR &u£Stm,tea£f 787XX DALLAS TX 7 52 02 73,429 M75282 U„Ui,l«iMUmiilil««»H

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Turner, Anthony Carl v. Texas, the State Of, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-anthony-carl-v-texas-the-state-of-texapp-1999.