Hill, Stanley Wayne ( 2006 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

---

NO. WR-63,807-01

---

EX PARTE STANLEY WAYNE HILL, Applicant

---

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

FROM CAUSE NO. 3954-A IN THE 31^ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF WHEELER COUNTY

---

Per curiam.

O R D E R  

This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus which was transmitted to this Court pursuant to the provisions of Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07. Applicant pleaded guilty to the offense of driving while intoxicated as a repeat offender, and punishment was assessed at eight years' confinement. No direct appeal was taken.

Applicant contends inter alia that while he was originally designated as a mandatory supervision prospect, he has recently been improperly re-classified as ineligible for mandatory supervision without explanation.

The trial court has not entered findings of fact or conclusions of law. We believe that Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Therefore, it is this Court's opinion that additional facts need to be developed and because this Court cannot hear evidence, the trial court is the appropriate forum. The trial court may resolve those issues as set out in Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, § 3 (d), in that it may order affidavits, depositions, or interrogatories from TDCJ, or it may order a hearing. In the appropriate case the trial court may rely on its personal recollection.

If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, the court shall first decide whether Applicant is indigent. If the trial court finds that Applicant is indigent and Applicant desires to be represented by counsel, the trial court will then, pursuant to the provisions of Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 26.04, appoint an attorney to represent him at the hearing.

Following receipt of additional information, the trial court shall make findings of fact as to whether, according to TDCJ's records, Applicant is designated as ineligible for mandatory supervision, and if so, why. The trial court shall also make any further findings of fact and conclusions of law it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of the application for writ of habeas corpus.

Because this Court does not hear evidence, Ex Parte Rodriquez, 334 S.W.2d 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), this application for a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus will be held in abeyance pending the trial court's compliance with this order. Resolution of the issues shall be accomplished by the trial court within ninety days of the date of this order. ⁽¹⁾ A supplemental transcript containing all affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter's notes from any hearing or deposition, along with the trial court's supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall be returned to this Court within one hundred and twenty days of the date of this order. ⁽²⁾

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 1st DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2006.

EN BANC

DO NOT PUBLISH   

1.

In the event any continuances are granted, copies of the order granting the continuance should be provided to this Court.

2.

Any extensions of this time period should be obtained from this Court.