Garcia, Ruben Jr ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •        In the Court of Criminal
    Appeals of Texas
    ══════════
    No. WR-90,719-01
    ══════════
    EX PARTE RUBEN GARCIA, JR.,
    Applicant
    ═══════════════════════════════════════
    On Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
    Cause No. 7691-1 in the 82nd District Court
    From Falls County
    ═══════════════════════════════════════
    YEARY, J., filed a concurring opinion in which SLAUGHTER, J.,
    joined.
    Applicant pled guilty and was convicted in 2003 of aggravated
    robbery and sentenced to ninety years’ imprisonment. He waived his
    right of appeal.
    In November 2019, Applicant filed an application for writ of
    habeas corpus in the county of conviction. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art.
    GARCIA – 2
    11.07. In his application, he alleges multiple claims, including
    ineffective assistance of counsel, but the fact sections in his form writ
    application refer to a “Memorandum of Law and Exhibits” that is
    missing from the writ application.
    Today, the Court remands this application to the trial court to
    further develop the record. I join the Court’s remand order. But I write
    separately to address my thoughts concerning the doctrine of laches and
    its possible application to this case. See Ex parte Smith, 
    444 S.W.3d 661
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (holding a trial court has the authority to sua
    sponte consider the doctrine of laches); Ex parte Bazille, ___ S.W.3d ___,
    No. WR-89,851-02, 
    2022 WL 108348
     (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 12, 2022)
    (Yeary, J., concurring).
    The doctrine of laches ought to be considered in a case like this
    one. Applicant’s trial occurred in 2003, but this writ application was not
    filed until over sixteen years later. The record is also silent regarding
    circumstances that may excuse Applicant’s delay, and at least some
    explanation for the long delay in filing should be provided.
    Consistent with this Court’s precedent, the trial court may, sua
    sponte, give Applicant the opportunity to explain the reasons for the
    delay. It may also give the State’s prosecutors and/or former counsel for
    Applicant an opportunity to state whether Applicant’s delay has caused
    any prejudice to their ability to defend against Applicant’s claims. 1 And
    1 “Our revised approach will permit courts to more broadly consider the
    diminished memories of trial participants and the diminished availability of
    the State’s evidence, both of which may often be said to occur beyond five years
    after a conviction becomes final.” Ex parte Perez, 
    398 S.W.3d 206
    , 216 (Tex.
    Crim. App. 2013) (citing Ex parte Steptoe, 
    132 S.W.3d 434
    , 437–39 (Tex. Crim.
    App. 2004) (Cochran, J., dissenting)).
    GARCIA – 3
    ultimately, the trial court may include findings of fact and conclusions
    of law concerning the doctrine of laches in its response to this Court’s
    remand order.
    With these additional thoughts, I join the Court’s order.
    FILED:                          April 27, 2022
    DO NOT PUBLISH
    

Document Info

Docket Number: WR-90,719-01

Filed Date: 4/27/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 5/2/2022