NUMBER 13-21-00376-CR COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG EX PARTE OMAR ALONSO On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 of Hidalgo County, Texas. MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Benavides, Silva, and Peña1 Memorandum Opinion by Justice Silva Appellee Omar Alonso successfully sought post-conviction habeas relief from a conviction of one count of assault causing bodily injury, family violence, a Class A misdemeanor. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.01(a)(1); TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. arts. 11.072, 11.09. In one issue, appellant the State of Texas asserts the trial court 1 The Honorable Leticia Hinojosa, former Justice of this Court, did not participate in this decision because her term of office expired on December 31, 2022. In accordance with the appellate rules, she was replaced on panel by Justice Lionel Aron Peña Jr. See TEX. R. APP. P. 41.1. abused its discretion in granting Alonso’s application because he failed to allege and prove facts entitling him to relief. However, because no statutorily required findings of fact and conclusions of law appear in the record, without addressing the merits of the issue raised in this appeal, we reverse the trial court’s order setting aside Alonso’s conviction and remand. I. BACKGROUND On March 23, 2020, Alonso filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus seeking to set aside the order of deferred adjudication in cause number CR-16-05952-A 2 on the basis that his guilty plea had been involuntarily made because his court appointed trial counsel, Robert Capello Jr., was ineffective. Specifically, Alonso alleged that Capello never admonished him on the immigration consequences of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor assault charge. Alonso later filed an amended application, wherein Alonso additionally argued that his trial counsel had been ineffective in failing to ensure his competency to enter a plea. Affidavits signed by Alonso accompanied the filed applications. At a hearing on his habeas application, Alonso testified that Capello never advised that a plea of guilty would carry deportation consequences. Alonso stated, “[Capello] did not tell me anything about the immigration [sic]. . . . He never told me anything about the consequences of pleading guilty.” On cross-examination, Alonso also complained that neither the trial court nor Capello told him that, in pleading guilty, he would be subject to 2 Alonso pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea bargain agreement to the offense as charged on July 19, 2016, and the trial court placed Alonso on deferred adjudication community supervision for a term of eighteen months. Alonso was ultimately discharged from his community supervision. 2 terms of community supervision. Alonso testified, “I pleaded guilty because [Capello] said I was going to go home quick.” When asked if he thought he was “just going to plead guilty and they were going to let [him] go home and nothing was going to happen and that was the end of the case,” Alonso answered in the affirmative. Meanwhile, Capello testified that he admonished Alonso regarding the immigration consequences associated with entering a …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals