Castaneda, Francisco E.

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-53,759-02 EX PARTE FRANCISCO E. CASTANEDA, Applicant ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. CR-1353-97-B(2) IN THE 93RD DISTRICT COURT FROM HIDALGO COUNTY Per curiam. O R D E R 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 two counts of aggravated robbery, one count of aggravated kidnapping, and one count of aggravated sexual assault and was sentenced to imprisonment. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions on appeal but remanded for a new punishment trial. Castaneda v. State, No. 13-98-575-CR, 28 S.W.3d 685 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 2000, no pet.). After the new punishment trial, Applicant was sentenced to imprisonment for ten years on one count of aggravated robbery, twenty-five years on the other count of aggravated robbery, thirty years on the count of aggravated kidnapping, and sixty-five years on the count of aggravated sexual assault. Applicant again appealed, but the convictions and sentences were affirmed. Castaneda v. State, No. 13-02-146-CR (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi, delivered November 4, 2004, pet. ref'd). Applicant contends that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance during the first appeal because counsel failed to timely notify Applicant that the judgment finding Applicant guilty had been affirmed and failed advise him of his right to petition for discretionary review pro se. Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 608 (1984); Ex parte Lemke, 13 S.W.3d 791,795-96 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000). In these circumstances, additional facts are needed. Pursuant to Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court shall provide appellate counsel with the opportunity to respond to Applicant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on appeal. The trial court may use any means set out in Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, § 3(d). In the appropriate case, the trial court may rely on its personal recollection. Id. If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 26.04. The trial court shall make findings of fact as to whether Applicant's appellate counsel timely informed Applicant that judgment finding Applicant guilty had been affirmed during the first appeal and that he has a right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. The trial court shall also make any other findings of fact and conclusions of law that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of Applicant's claim for habeas corpus relief. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. If any continuances are granted, a copy of the order granting the continuance shall be sent to this Court. A supplemental transcript containing all affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter's notes from any hearing or deposition, along with the trial court's supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall be returned to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time shall be obtained from this Court. Filed: August 30, 2006 Do not publish