EX PARTE RAY CHARLES HAWKINS (original)

Annotate this Case
Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion     Close This Window

span.WPParaBox { padding: 0px; width: 100%; margin: 0px; display: block } div.WPParaBoxWrapper { padding: 0px; float: left } p { margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1px } hr { height: 0.0125in; background-color: black } body { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal }








IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS



NO. AP-75,957




EX PARTE RAY CHARLES HAWKINS, Applicant




ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. IN THE 114TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM SMITH COUNTY




           Per curiam.


O P I N I O N


            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 indecency with a child and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment.

            Applicant contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he failed to timely file a notice of appeal. The trial court appointed habeas counsel and held a hearing on Applicant’s claims.

            The trial court has determined that trial counsel failed to timely file a notice of appeal. We find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time appeal of the judgment of conviction in Case No. 4-93-821-A from the 114th Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas. Applicant is ordered returned to that time at which he may give a written notice of appeal so that he may then, with the aid of counsel, obtain a meaningful appeal. All time limits shall be calculated as if the sentence had been imposed on the date on which the mandate of this Court issues. We hold that, should Applicant desire to prosecute an appeal, he must take affirmative steps to file a written notice of appeal in the trial court within 30 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

 

Delivered: July 2, 2008

Do Not Publish

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.