Terrell, Carlton Donnell ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •              IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
    OF TEXAS
    NO. WR-92,346-01
    EX PARTE CARLTON DONNELL TERRELL, Applicant
    ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
    CAUSE NO. 1506164-A IN THE 182ND DISTRICT COURT
    FROM HARRIS COUNTY
    Per curiam.
    ORDER
    Applicant was convicted of aggravated robbery and sentenced to forty years’ imprisonment.
    The Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Terrell v. State, No. 14-18-00790-CR
    (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] del. Jul. 16, 2019). 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 claims that the State violated Brady, that the State obtained a false identification
    of him at trial, and that trial and appellate counsel were both ineffective. Brady v. Maryland, 
    373 U.S. 83
     (1963); Ex parte Weinstein, 
    421 S.W.3d 656
     (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); Strickland v.
    Washington, 
    466 U.S. 668
     (1984).
    2
    The State disclosed evidence after trial that the complainant, who testified and identified
    Applicant at trial, had an alias and a prior criminal history, which included compelling prostitution
    of a minor, transportation of untaxed tobacco products, theft of property greater than $500 and less
    than $1,500, illegal use of food stamps less than $200, conspiracy to smuggle and transport illegal
    aliens into the United States, and bringing illegal aliens into the United States for financial gain.
    Applicant says, “[This Brady evidence] would have explain[ed] some of what I stated in my
    testimony. Also [it would have] show[n] that the complainant wasn’t [an] innocent victim in this
    case or law abiding citizen.” There are no findings on the claim.
    Applicant says no witness identified him after the offense although shown photo lineups
    within hours of the robbery, and he says one of the witnesses picked out two different people in
    separate photo lineups. He says the prosecutor, on the day of but before trial, had Applicant brought
    into the courtroom to be viewed by at least one witness, and then at trial the witnesses were “100%
    sure I was one of the criminals.” He questions: “How’s that, after 2½ [years] had passed they was
    100% sure and about 2 [hours] after the crime was committed they didn’t pick me out of the photo
    spread?” There are no findings on the claim.
    The Brady evidence was disclosed to both trial and appellate counsel after trial. It is not clear
    whether either counsel addressed the evidence in a motion for new trial, and appellate counsel filed
    a brief in accordance with Anders v. State of Cal., 
    386 U.S. 738
    , 744 (1967). Applicant complains
    that both his trial and appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance regarding the Brady evidence.
    Applicant also complains that trial counsel failed to effectively represent him at trial regarding other
    witnesses, including a police detective who he says falsely changed her testimony after speaking with
    trial counsel, and a witness Applicant says trial counsel frightened into not testifying on his behalf.
    3
    There is no response from either trial or appellate counsel or findings from the trial court regarding
    the claims.
    Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Accordingly, the record
    should be developed. The trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. TEX . CODE CRIM .
    PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court shall order trial and appellate counsel to respond to
    Applicant’s claims. In developing the record, the trial court may use any means set out in Article
    11.07, § 3(d). If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is
    indigent. If Applicant is indigent and wants to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint
    counsel to represent him at the hearing. See TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 26.04. If counsel is
    appointed or retained, the trial court shall immediately notify this Court of counsel’s name.
    The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law resolving the disputed
    factual issues. The trial court may also make any other findings and conclusions that it deems
    appropriate. The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety 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.
    Filed: April 14, 2021
    Do not publish
    

Document Info

Docket Number: WR-92,346-01

Filed Date: 4/14/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/19/2021