Martinez, Adalberto ( 2022 )

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-93,834-01
EX PARTE ADALBERTO MARTINEZ, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. 71837-A IN THE 412TH DISTRICT COURT
FROM BRAZORIA COUNTY
Per curiam.
ORDER
Applicant was convicted of injury to a child and was sentenced to fifty years’ imprisonment.
The Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Martinez v. State, 468 S.W.3d 711 (Tex.
App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015). 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 due process because the former District Clerk for
Brazoria County used an unconstitutional selection system to create jury panels. Applicant has
alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. See Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493, 502 (1972)
(plurality). Accordingly, the record should be developed. The trial court is the appropriate forum
2
for findings of fact. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). Due to the extreme technicality and
future implications of this case, the interests of justice require representation; therefore, the Court
instructs the trial court to appoint Applicant an attorney to represent him. See TEX . CODE CRIM .
PROC. art. 26.04; TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 1.051 § (d)(3). When counsel is appointed, 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 Applicant’s
due process rights were violated. The trial court shall make specific findings as to (1) whether the
former Brazoria County District Clerk, Rhonda Barchak, utilized a race-based jury selection system
to create jury panels; (2) whether Barchak’s selection system had an impact on the racial composition
of the jury panels in Brazoria county, including whether certain races or groups were excluded or
under-represented; (3) whether Applicant’s specific jury panel represented a fair cross section of his
community; and (4) whether Barchak’s error, if any, is considered structural or non-structural error.
The trial court may make any other findings and conclusions that it deems appropriate in response
to Applicant’s claim. It appears that there is a one-hundred-and-seventy-seven-page report by the
Texas Ranger’s Public Integrity Unit regarding Barchak’s selection system. If the trial court has the
ability to obtain this investigative report, it shall supplement the writ record with a copy.
The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within one-hundred-and-
twenty days from the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this
Court the trial court’s 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.
3
Filed: July 27, 2022
Do not publish