EX PARTE ANDRE LEROY GARRETT, Applicant (Other)

Annotate this Case




IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,657
EX PARTE ANDRE LEROY GARRETT, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. W97-50389-Q IN THE 204TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
FROM DALLAS 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 aggravated sexual assault and sentenced to thirty-five years' imprisonment. The Sixth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Garrett v. State, No. 06-98-00156-CR (Tex. App. - Texarkana, July 16, 1999).

Applicant contends, inter alia, that he was improperly denied his right to have this Court consider the merits of his pro se petition for discretionary review. This Court refused his petition as untimely filed on September 9, 1999, and denied his subsequent motions for rehearing or reconsideration.

Based on this Court's recent holding in Campbell v. State, 320 S.W.3d 338 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010), the trial court has entered findings of fact and conclusions of law finding that Applicant's pro se petition was in fact timely filed by delivery to the prison authorities. 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 Sixth Court of Appeals in Cause No. 06-98-00156-CR that affirmed his conviction in Case No. F97-50389 from the 204th Judicial District Court of Dallas County. Applicant shall file his petition for discretionary review with this Court within 30 days of the date on which this Court's mandate issues. Applicant's remaining claims are dismissed. See Ex parte Torres, 943 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).

 

Delivered: October 5, 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Do not publish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.