Ex parte Salim
| Citation | 595 S.W.3d 844 |
| Decision Date | 16 January 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 02-19-00200-CR, No. 02-19-00201-CR,02-19-00200-CR |
| Parties | EX PARTE Mohammad Rashid SALIM |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas |
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: HEATHER M. LYTLE, ARLINGTON, TEXAS.
ATTORNEY FOR STATE: SHAREN WILSON, CRIMINAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY; JOSEPH W. SPENCE, CHIEF OF THE POST-CONVICTION DIVISION; ANDREA JACOBS, TIMOTHY RODGERS, SAMANTHA FANT, ASSISTANT CRIMINAL DISTRICT, ATTORNEYS FOR TARRANT COUNTY, FORT WORTH, TEXAS.
Before Gabriel, Kerr, and Wallach, JJ.
Appellant Mohammad Rashid Salim, a citizen of Jordan, appeals the trial court's denial of his requests for habeas relief. We affirm.
Appellant pled guilty to two separately charged counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon in exchange for five years' deferred adjudication community supervision. A week later, his trial counsel (Trial Counsel) filed a "Motion for New Trial and Motion in Arrest of Judgment," seeking to withdraw Appellant's guilty pleas on the basis of incompetency due to drug use. That motion was denied by operation of law.
About seven months after the plea bargains, the State filed a motion to adjudicate Appellant's guilt in both cases, arguing that he violated his terms of community supervision by using drugs, twice refusing to submit to drug tests, and failing to complete an intensive day treatment program. Appellant was arrested pursuant to a warrant. In each case, Appellant's new counsel (Habeas Counsel One) filed an application for writ of habeas corpus on a Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.07 form (Application One), arguing that Appellant's guilty plea was not knowing or voluntary and that Trial Counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07.
The trial court treated Application One as an Article 11.072 application and denied relief in a written order in June 2018. See id. art. 11.072. The trial court also issued the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, adopting all but one of the State's proposed findings and conclusions:
. ...
30. Positive results for methamphetamine from a urinalysis "generally indicate use within 1–4 days but could be up to a week following heavy chronic use." ...
31. "Positive morphine urine results generally indicate use within the last two to three days, or longer after prolonged use." ...
32. A positive urinalysis result was only evidence that App[ell]ant had used methamphetamines and morphine within the last couple days.
33. App[ell]ant presents no evidence that he was incompetent at the time of his plea. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Juara
..., No. PD-1135-17, 2018 WL 344321, at *1 (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 10, 2018) (per curiam order) (not designated for publication). Ex parte Salim , 595 S.W.3d 844, 853 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.).B. The general principles that we apply to an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel c......
-
Ex parte Van Dyke, 02-20-00039-CR
...An applicant seeking habeas relief under Article 11.072 hasthe burden of proving his claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Ex parte Salim, 595 S.W.3d 844, 853 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2020, no pet.) (citing State v. Guerrero, 400 S.W.3d 576, 583 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013)). We review the trial......
-
Najar v. State
...as evidenced by the affidavit of his later-sought immigration attorney, but appellant failed to heed counsel's advice. See Ex parte Salim, 595 S.W.3d 844, 856 App.-Fort Worth 2020, no pet.) (noting that appellant did not heed plea counsel's advice to seek immigration counsel in holding plea......
-
Ex parte Juara
...No. PD-1135-17, 2018 WL 344321, at *1 (Tex. Crim. App. Jan. 10, 2018) (per curiam order) (not designated for publication). Ex parte Salim, 595 S.W.3d 844, 853 (Tex. Worth 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.). B. The general principles that we apply to an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim Here, J......