EX PARTE JOHNATHEN LEE HARRISON (other)

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

















IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS



NO. AP-76,603

EX PARTE JOHNATHEN LEE HARRISON, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. CR20133-B IN THE 35TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

FROM BROWN 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 a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of burglary of a habitation and sentenced to sixty years' imprisonment.

Applicant contends, inter alia, that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he failed to timely file a notice of appeal. Appellate counsel erroneously calculated the deadline for filing notice of appeal from the date upon which the trial court entered a judgment nunc pro tunc, rather than from the date upon which the sentence was originally imposed. Applicant's direct appeal was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

We find, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time appeal of the judgment of conviction in Cause No. CR20133-B from the 35th Judicial District Court of Brown County. 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.

Applicant's remaining claims are dismissed. See Ex parte Torres, 943 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).







Delivered: August 24, 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Do Not Publish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.