Williams, Stephen Warren
This text of Williams, Stephen Warren (Williams, Stephen Warren) 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-40,677-02
EX PARTE STEPHEN WARREN WILLIAMS, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 94-68074-B IN THE 252ND DISTRICT COURT FROM JEFFERSON COUNTY
Per curiam.
ORDER
Applicant was convicted of aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon and sentenced to 25
years’ imprisonment. The Ninth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Williams v. State, No.
09-95-397-CR (Tex. App. –Beaumont, Nov. 5, 1997, pet. ref’d). He was released to parole and that
parole was later revoked. 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 he was denied time credit for periods when he was released on parole
as well as time credit for periods of time that he was held pursuant to pre-revocation (blue) warrants.
Applicant is not entitled to street time credit. TEX . GOV ’T CODE § 508.283(b) and (c); Ex parte 2
Spann, 132 S.W.3d 390 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). However, his claim concerning time credit for pre-
revocation confinement may allege facts which if true entitle him to relief. Ex parte Canada, 754
S.W.2d 660, 668 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). 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 the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s Office of the General
Counsel to obtain a response from a person with knowledge of relevant facts. The response shall
address the merits of the time credit claim. The response shall also state whether Applicant
presented a claim to the time credit resolution system of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
and, if so, the date the claim was presented.
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 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 findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether, before filing
this application, Applicant properly exhausted his administrative remedies as required by §
501.0081(b) of the Government Code. The court shall determine whether Applicant is entitled to
and receiving credit for time spent in confinement under pre-revocation (“blue”) warrants. 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 3
findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,
affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from
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: June 30, 2021 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
Williams, Stephen Warren, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-stephen-warren-texcrimapp-2021.