Lucero, Ex Parte Jimmie Urbano ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •            IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
    OF TEXAS
    NO. AP-76,415
    EX PARTE JIMMIE URBANO LUCERO
    ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN CAUSE
    NO. 48,593-01-C IN THE 251 ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
    POTTER COUNTY
    Per Curiam.
    OPINION
    This is a post conviction application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the
    provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.071. Applicant was convicted of
    capital murder on May 23, 2005. The jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant
    to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 37.071, and the trial court, accordingly, set
    punishment at death. This Court affirmed applicant’s conviction and sentence on direct
    appeal. Lucero v. State, 
    246 S.W.3d 86
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2008).
    Lucero - 2
    Applicant presents five allegations in his application in which he challenges the
    validity of his conviction and resulting sentence. The trial court held an evidentiary hearing.
    Applicant subsequently agreed to waive his first, second, fourth, and fifth allegations;
    because of this waiver these claims are not before us on habeas review. The trial court
    adopted the parties’ agreed findings of fact and conclusions of law pertaining to allegation
    three based upon ineffective assistance of counsel.
    This Court has reviewed the record with respect to the ineffective assistance of
    counsel allegation made by applicant. Based on the habeas court’s findings and conclusions
    and our own review, we hold that applicant’s counsel failed to investigate applicant’s
    background or present mitigating evidence at the punishment phase in violation of Rompilla
    v Beard, 
    545 U.S. 374
    (2005). See also Wiggins v. Smith, 
    539 U.S. 510
    (2003); Williams v.
    Taylor, 
    529 U.S. 362
    (2000). Therefore, relief is granted.
    We vacate applicant’s sentence and remand the case to the trial court for a new
    punishment hearing or other proceeding consistent with this opinion. See T EX. C ODE C RIM.
    P ROC. art. 44.251(c).1
    IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 15 th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010.
    Do Not Publish
    1
    Applicant and the State request that, in the interest of justice, this Court reverse the
    punishment judgment and render a life sentence. This Court may not honor the parties’ request
    at this time. See TEX . R. APP . P. 78.1 and T EX. C ODE C RIM. P ROC. art. 44.251(b).
    

Document Info

Docket Number: AP-76,415

Filed Date: 9/15/2010

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/16/2015