EX PARTE ANDRES GOMEZ LONGORIA, Applicant (Other)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. AP-76,930 EX PARTE ANDRES GOMEZ LONGORIA, Applicant ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 06-8-22,681-D IN THE 377TH DISTRICT COURT FROM VICTORIA COUNTY Per curiam. OPINION 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 murder and was sentenced to ninety-nine years imprisonment. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Longoria v. State, 13-07-00436-CR (Tex.App. Corpus Christi del. Dec. 18, 2008). Applicant raises several claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, and he also contends he was denied his right to pursue a petition for discretionary review. This Court remanded the application to the trial court for findings. Appellate counsel, who was also trial counsel, filed an affidavit with the trial court responding to the claims. Based on counsel s affidavit, the trial court -2has entered findings of fact and conclusions of law indicating that Applicant was not timely advised of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. See Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex.Crim. App. 1997). We hold, therefore, that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition for discretionary review of the judgment of the Thirteenth Court of Appeals in Cause No. 13-0700436-CR that affirmed his conviction in Cause No. 06-8-22,681-D from the 377th District Court of Victoria 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 without prejudice. Delivered: December 12, 2012 Do not publish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.