EX PARTE DAVID MEJIA (other)

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

















IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS



NO. AP-76,576

EX PARTE DAVID MEJIA, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 98-5-17,336-D-1 IN THE 377th DISTRICT COURT

FROM VICTORIA 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 murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The 13th Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Mejia v. State, No. 13-99-00160-CR (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi, delivered June 1, 2000, no pet.).

Applicant contends that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance because counsel failed to timely notify Applicant that his conviction had been affirmed and failed to advise him of his right to petition for discretionary review pro se.

Appellate counsel filed an affidavit with the trial court. Based on that affidavit, the trial court has entered findings of fact and conclusions of law that appellate counsel failed to advise him of his right to petition for discretionary review pro se. The trial court recommends that relief be granted. Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). We find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition for discretionary review of the judgment of the 13th Court of Appeals in Cause No. 13-99-00160-CR that affirmed his conviction in Case No. 98-5-17,366-D-1 from the 377th Judicial District Court of Victoria County. Applicant shall file his petition for discretionary review with the 13th Court of Appeals within 30 days of the date on which this Court's mandate issues.



Delivered: June 15, 2011

Do not publish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.