NUMBERS 13-22-00120-CR, 13-22-00121-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG EX PARTE JOSE ANTONIO SANCHEZ-HERNANDEZ On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 of Cameron County, Texas. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Silva and Peña Memorandum Opinion by Justice Silva Appellant Jose Antonio Sanchez-Hernandez a/k/a Jose Antonio Hernandez Sanchez unsuccessfully sought post-conviction habeas corpus relief from two misdemeanor convictions: possession of marijuana and unlawful carrying of a weapon. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.09 (habeas application on misdemeanor conviction); TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.121 (marijuana possession); TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 46.02 (unlawful carry). On appeal, appellant contends—as he did in his habeas applications—that the judgments should be vacated because (1) at the time of his guilty pleas, he had no understanding of the English language, and this rendered his pleas of guilty involuntary; and (2) he is “actually innocent.” The State, contesting only appellant’s innocence claim, concedes that appellant’s pleas were made involuntarily and asks that this Court reverse the convictions. Because we conclude the habeas court’s orders of denial were not merit- based, we dismiss these appeals for want of jurisdiction. I. BACKGROUND On or about August 8, 1992, following surveillance of a suspected cocaine operation, police executed a search warrant of a motel room in Brownsville, Texas. Officers seized marijuana, cocaine, and two semiautomatic handguns found in plain sight. Appellant, along with four other room occupants, was present at the time the warrant was executed. All those present denied ownership of the seized weapons and drugs, claimed to be undocumented non-U.S. citizens, and were subsequently arrested and charged. Appellant later pleaded guilty to two offenses relating to his arrest: unlawful carrying of a weapon in cause number 92-CCR-7304-B and possession of marijuana in cause number 92-CCR-7306-B. 1 The trial court sentenced appellant to ninety days’ confinement in the county jail in both causes and ordered the sentences to run concurrently. Nearly thirty years later, on December 6, 2021, appellant filed his amended application for writ of habeas corpus in both causes pursuant to Article 11.09, alleging: 1Appellant had also been indicted for possession of a controlled substance, namely, cocaine. This charge was later dismissed by the State. 2 (1) his pleas had been involuntary because he “did not have an adequate understanding of English[,] and the record does not show he was provided with a language interpreter”; and (2) he “is actually innocent.” Affixed to appellant’s habeas applications were copies of the clerk’s records for his co-defendants’ cases and for the underlying convictions he sought relief from in cause numbers 92-CCR-7304-B and 92-CCR-7306-B. The clerk’s records for both cause numbers contained written waivers of counsel, waivers of jury trial, and pleas of guilty signed by appellant. No reporter’s records relating to either cause number were attached, and no affidavits accompanied either of appellant’s habeas applications. At a hearing on appellant’s habeas applications, the State notified the habeas court that it was “not contesting” …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals