Lewis, Jordan ( 2017 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-86,781-01
EX PARTE JORDAN LEWIS, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. 13-11-205-CRW-A IN THE 81ST DISTRICT COURT
FROM WILSON COUNTY
K EASLER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which H ERVEY and Y EARY, JJ., joined.
DISSENTING OPINION
I dissent to the Court’s granting Jordan Lewis habeas relief on the basis of an alleged
double-jeopardy violation. For the reasons outlined in my concurring opinion in Ex parte
Marascio,1 I would deny Lewis’s bare double-jeopardy claims because his multiple-
punishments double-jeopardy claims may not be raised for the first time in a collateral
proceeding.
However, Lewis raises two cognizable and potentially meritorious claims that the
1
Ex parte Marascio, 471 S.W.3d 832, 833 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015) (Keasler, J.,
concurring).
LEWIS DISSENT—2
Court leaves unaddressed: ineffective assistance of trial counsel and ineffective assistance
of appellate counsel.2 Rather than granting relief on a noncognizable claim, I would remand
this matter to the habeas court to obtain responses from trial and appellate counsel answering
Lewis’s allegations that counsel were ineffective for failing to assert that imposing sentences
for aggravated robbery and aggravated assault violated double-jeopardy. I would further
require the habeas judge to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law on these claims.
Because the Court does not remand this matter for the habeas court to address the
merits of the only properly-raised claims in Lewis’s application, I dissent.
Filed: November 15, 2017
Do not publish
2
Id. at 836.