EX PARTE ROLANDO CALDERILLA v. << (2022)

OPINION

Applicant was convicted of burglary of a habitation and sentenced to ninety-nine years’ imprisonment. The Ninth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Calderilla v. State, 09-19-00113-CR (Tex. App.–Beaumont June 24,2020). 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, appellate counsel's performance was deficient and Applicant would have timely filed a petition 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 an out-of-time petition for discretionary review of the judgment of the Ninth Court of Appeals in cause number 09-19-00113-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.

Per curiam.

SLAUGHTER, J. filed a concurring opinion.