             IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
                         OF TEXAS
                                         NO. WR-83,775-03


                     EX PARTE WILLIAM SOLOMON LEWIS, Applicant


                    ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
                    CAUSE NO. 1219699-A IN THE 338TH DISTRICT COURT
                                FROM HARRIS COUNTY


      Per curiam. ALCALA , J., filed a concurring opinion in which JOHNSON , J., joined.
YEARY , J., filed a concurring opinion in which KEASLER and HERVEY , JJ., joined.

                                              ORDER

        Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of retaliation and

sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction.

Lewis v. State, No. 14-10-00222-CR (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Jun. 28, 2011) (not designated

for publication).

        Applicant contends, among other things, that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance

because he did not discover and present evidence that Applicant’s threats, made after he was tasered,
                                                                                                      2

embraced only legal activities, such as pursuing lawsuits, internal investigations, and media

attention. He also argues that counsel should have discovered information about the complainant that

could have been used to impeach his testimony.

       Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668 (1984); Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114, 115 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). In these

circumstances, additional facts are needed. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez, 334 S.W.2d 294, 294

(Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. The trial court

shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The

trial court may use any means set out in TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). In the

appropriate case, the trial court may rely on its personal recollection. Id.

       If the trial court elects to hold a hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent.

If Applicant is indigent and wishes to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an

attorney to represent Applicant at the hearing. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 26.04.

       The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whether the

performance of Applicant’s trial counsel was deficient and, if so, whether counsel’s deficient

performance prejudiced Applicant. The trial court shall make additional findings addressing

Applicant’s claim that this conviction restrains him because it has been used to enhance his current

federal sentence. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07 § 3(c). The trial court shall also make any other

findings of fact and conclusions of law that it deems relevant and appropriate to the disposition of

Applicant’s claim for habeas corpus relief.

       This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fact issues. The

issues shall be resolved within 90 days of this order. A supplemental transcript containing all
                                                                                                   3

affidavits and interrogatories or the transcription of the court reporter’s notes from any hearing or

deposition, along with the trial court’s supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall

be forwarded to this Court within 120 days of the date of this order. Any extensions of time shall

be obtained from this Court.



Filed: June 29, 2016
Do not publish
