Rice, Ex Parte Reginald Donell ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •              IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
    OF TEXAS
    NO. AP-76,426
    EX PARTE REGINALD DONELL RICE, Applicant
    ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
    CAUSE NO. 366-83058-06 IN THE 366 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
    FROM COLLIN COUNTY
    Per curiam.
    OPINION
    Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the
    clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte
    Young, 
    418 S.W.2d 824
    , 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of a
    controlled substance and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed his
    conviction. Rice v. State, No. 05-07-00704-CR (Tex. App. – Dallas, August 14, 2008, pet. ref’d).
    Applicant contends, inter alia, that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because
    counsel failed to preserve issues regarding his motion to suppress evidence, and failed to object to
    the evidence when it was introduced at trial. Applicant also alleges that counsel failed to advise him
    2
    that the State was seeking to enhance his punishment, and entered a plea of “true” to the
    enhancements on Applicant’s behalf, knowing that Applicant intended to plead “not true.”
    The trial court obtained an affidavit from trial counsel, and conducted a habeas hearing at
    which trial counsel testified. Based on the record, affidavits and testimony, the trial court has
    determined that trial counsel’s performance was deficient in that counsel failed to preserve
    suppression issues by objecting when the evidence was introduced at trial, by not informing
    Applicant of the possible range of punishment in this case, and by pleading “true” to the
    enhancements on Applicant’s behalf when it was Applicant’s intent to plead “not true.” The trial
    court also finds that such ineffective representation prejudiced Applicant. We find, therefore, that
    Applicant is entitled to relief. The judgment in Cause No. 366-83058-06 from the 366th Judicial
    District Court of Collin County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff
    of Collin County to answer the charge against him.
    Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice–Correctional
    Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.
    Delivered: September 29, 2010
    Do Not Publish
    

Document Info

Docket Number: AP-76,426

Filed Date: 9/29/2010

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/16/2015