TOUCHET, DONALD LEONARD Appeal from Criminal District Court of Jefferson County (other per curiam)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-91,786-01 EX PARTE DONALD LEONARD TOUCET, Applicant ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 15-21899-A IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT FROM JEFFERSON COUNTY Per curiam. SLAUGHTER , J. filed a concurring opinion. OPINION Applicant was convicted of indecency with a child and sentenced to eighteen years’ imprisonment. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Toucet v. State, No. 13-1700393-CR (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi-Edinburg July 15, 2018)(not designated for publication). Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC . art. 11.07. Applicant contends that appellate counsel failed to timely inform Applicant that his conviction had been affirmed and advise him of his right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review. Based on the record, the trial court has determined that appellate counsel’s performance was deficient and that Applicant would have timely filed a petition for discretionary review but for counsel’s deficient 2 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 an out-of-time petition for discretionary review of the judgment of the Thirteenth Court of Appeals in cause number 13-17-00393-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. Applicant’s remaining claims are dismissed. Ex Parte Torres, 943 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). 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 Delivered: January 13, 2021 Do not publish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.