WILLIAMS, EVERETT CRAIG Appeal from 94th District Court of Nueces County (other per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NOS. WR-91,857-01 & WR-91,857-02 EX PARTE EVERETT CRAIG WILLIAMS, Applicant ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NOS. 16FC1670-C(1) & 17FC1694C(1) IN THE 94TH DISTRICT COURT FROM NUECES COUNTY Per curiam. OPINION Applicant was convicted of fraud and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment, and theft and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. Williams v. State, Nos. 13-18-00456 & 13-18-00454-CR (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg April 29, 2020)(not designated for publication). Applicant filed these applications for writs of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded them to this Court. See TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC . art. 11.07. Applicant contends that appellate counsel failed to timely inform Applicant that his convictions had been affirmed and advise him of his right to file pro se petitions for discretionary review. Based on the record, the trial court has determined that appellate counsel’s performance was 2 deficient and that Applicant would have timely filed petitions for discretionary review but for counsel’s deficient performance. Relief is granted. Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); Ex parte Crow, 180 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Applicant may file out-of-time petitions for discretionary review of the judgments of the Thirteenth Court of Appeals in cause numbers 13-18-00456-CR & 13-18-00454-CR. Should Applicant decide to file a petition for discretionary review, he must file it with this Court within thirty days from the date of this Court’s mandate. Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice–Correctional Institutions Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles. Delivered: October 28, 2020 Do not publish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.