Ex parte Young
| Decision Date | 08 March 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 45269,45269 |
| Citation | 479 S.W.2d 45 |
| Parties | Ex parte William Garland YOUNG. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Paul J. Chitwood, Dallas, for petitioner.
Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
DALLY, Commissioner.
This is a post-conviction habeas corpus proceeding, authorized by Article 11.07, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. See Ex Parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824 (Tex.Cr.App.1967).
Petitioner was convicted in Criminal District Court #3 of Dallas County, Texas, for the offense of rape and was sentenced to a life term in prison on March 22, 1961, in Cause No. C--8761--HJ. Review of that judgment on appeal was not sought.
Petitioner made application for habeas corpus to the convicting court, alleging that he was 'deprived of his right to appeal' in violation of his constitutional rights.
The convicting court, Honorable James B. Zimmermann, Presiding, appointed counsel for petitioner and conducted an evidentiary hearing on the allegations contained in the petition. After the hearing, the trial court found that: (1) petitioner was indigent at the time of his trial and sentencing; (2) petitioner was not advised of his right to appeal, that he did not know that the had a right to appeal; (3) that he did not waive his right to appeal, and (4) that had petitioner known of his rights to appeal, he would have exercised these privileges. The trial court concluded that petitioner had been deprived of his constitutional right to appeal and recommended that the writ be granted and made returnable to this court.
Initially, it should be noted that this court is not bound by the findings of the trial court in a habeas corpus proceeding. See Ex Parte Marez, 464 S.W.2d 866 (Tex.Cr.App.1971); Ex Parte Bazemore, 430 S.W.2d 205 (Tex.Cr.App.1968); Ex Parte Carpenter, 425 S.W.2d 821 (Tex.Cr.App.1968); Ex Parte Stickney, 349 S.W.2d 732 (Tex.Cr.App.1961); Ex Parte Johnson, 153 Tex.Cr.R. 619, 224 S.W.2d 240 (1949); Ex Parte Mitchell,462 S.W.2d 28 (Tex.Cr.App.1971); Ex Parte Young, Supra. Therefore, this court is required to determine if the record developed supports the trial judge's recommendation.
Petitioner was convicted in 1961, and according to the records of this court, petitioner has never before filed an application for writ of habeas corpus or complained that he was deprived of the right of appeal. After more than eight and one-half years in confinement, petitioner first began claiming that his constitutional right to appeal had been violated. While we do not desire to make an absolute rule concerning habeas corpus petitioners who do not assert their legal remedies promptly, we nevertheless feel that in some instances, a petitioner's delay in seeking relief can prejudice the credibility of his claim. Compare Ex Parte Thorbus, 455 S.W.2d 756 (Tex.Cr.App.1970).
In this particular application for writ of habeas corpus, petitioner alleged 'The attorney that was appointed to defend did not try to appeal my case . . . I told him I wanted to appeal and he told me to to shut up . . .' The substance of this sworn allegation is that the petitioner was aware of his right of appeal when it was available to him as a matter of right.
During the evidentiary hearing in this cause, petitioner testified under oath that he was 'not advised of his right to appeal'; and, that He did not know that he had a right to appeal; that if he had known of his right to appeal, he would have asserted this right, and that He did not learn of this right to appeal until he had spent some two years in the penitentiary.
There is a direct conflict between petitioner's sworn pleadings and his testimony under oath.
The only other witness that testified in the evidentiary hearing was Paul Wisdom, attorney at law, who petitioner said represented him in his trial. Attorney Wisdom testified that he had no recollection of this case, and that he did not represent this defendant during trial. The docket sheet in this case reflects that J. P. Calhoun and Paul Lisner were court appointed to represent this defendant at trial. Petitioner produced no evidence other than his own testimony to support his application for writ of habeas corpus.
In a habeas corpus proceeding, there exists a presumption of regularity of the judgment which can only be overcome by the petitioner showing that there is substantial evidence to the contrary. See Ex Parte Cross, 427 S.W.2d 64 (Te...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Medina
...the petitioner's showing that there is substantial evidence to the contrary." Mines, 26 S.W.3d at 914 n. 25 (quoting Ex parte Young, 479 S.W.2d 45, 47 (Tex.Crim.App.1972) ). It has been recently argued that, in a death-penalty case, the statutory post-conviction habeas corpus remedy is more......
-
Ex parte Bagley
...findings when the record will not support the trial court's findings. Ex parte Williams, Tex.Cr.App., 486 S.W.2d 566; Ex parte Young, Tex.Cr.App., 479 S.W.2d 45. Petitioner in his hearing introduced in evidence as a part of the record the statement of facts reflecting the evidence given in ......
-
Ex parte Davila, 50334
...in a habeas corpus proceeding and may make contrary findings when the record will not support the trial court's findings. Ex Parte Young, Tex.Cr.App., 479 S.W.2d 45, and cases cited therein. Nevertheless, the finding of the exact date of birth and the exact age of the victim by the court wh......
-
In re Orozco
...affidavits). An applicant's delay in seeking habeas corpus relief may prejudice the credibility of his claim. See Ex parte Young, 479 S.W.2d 45, 46-47 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972)(in case where facts and circumstances of case could not be fully explored because some participants had died, and the m......
-
Pretrial Motions
...Lൺඐඒൾඋ’ඌ Hൺඇൽൻඈඈ 12-76 An applicant’s delay in seeking habeas corpus relief may prejudice the credibility of his claim. Ex parte Young, 479 S.W.2d 45 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Kniatt. The voluntary nature of a defendant’s guilty plea can be shown in the record by the overwhelming evidence th......
-
Pretrial Motions
...App. 1997); Kniatt. An applicant’s delay in seeking habeas corpus relief may prejudice the credibility of his claim. Ex parte Young, 479 S.W.2d 45 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Kniatt. The voluntary nature of a defendant’s guilty plea can be shown in the record by the overwhelming evidence that t......
-
Pretrial Motions
...App. 1997); Kniatt. An applicant’s delay in seeking habeas corpus relief may prejudice the credibility of his claim. Ex parte Young, 479 S.W.2d 45 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Kniatt. The voluntary nature of a defendant’s guilty plea can be shown in the record by the overwhelming evidence that t......
-
Pretrial Motions
...App. 1997); Kniatt. An applicant’s delay in seeking habeas corpus relief may prejudice the credibility of his claim. Ex parte Young, 479 S.W.2d 45 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Kniatt. The voluntary nature of a defendant’s guilty plea can be shown in the record by the overwhelming evidence that t......