Little, Thomas

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-85,310-01
EX PARTE THOMAS LITTLE, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. 14-0698-CR-C-A IN THE 25TH DISTRICT COURT
FROM GUADALUPE COUNTY
K EASLER, J., filed a dissenting opinion in which K ELLER, P.J., joined.
DISSENTING OPINION
I dissent to the Court’s granting Thomas Little 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 Little’s double-jeopardy claim because his multiple-punishments
double-jeopardy claim may not be raised for the first time in a collateral proceeding.
Instead, I would remand the case to the habeas court to comply with this Court’s
remand order instructing the judge to “make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to
1
Ex parte Marascio, 471 S.W.3d 832, 833 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015) (Keasler, J.,
concurring).
LITTLE DISSENT—2
whether the performance of [Little’s] counsel was deficient and, if so, whether counsel’s
deficient performance prejudiced [Little].” Although the habeas judge ordered Little’s
appellate counsel to file an affidavit answering Little’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel
claim, the judge did not enter any findings of fact or conclusions of law on this claim.
Alternatively, we could grant relief on Little’s ineffective-assistance claim in light of
counsel’s admission that his failure to allege a double-jeopardy violation on direct appeal was
deficient conduct.
Because the Court neither remands nor addresses the merits of the only properly-
raised claim in Little’s application, I dissent.
Filed: April 12, 2017
Do not publish