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 these applications for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of two counts of aggravated robbery and sentenced to two terms of ninety-two years' imprisonment. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions. Ethel v. State, Nos. 14-04-00093-CR & 14-04-00094-CR (Tex. App.-Houston [14^th Dist.], Aug. 16, 2005, no pet.).

On February 7, 2007, we remanded these applications and directed the trial court to enter findings of fact and conclusions of law on whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. On November 20, 2008, Applicant filed motions with this Court requesting an indefinite extension of time until we decide whether he has a right to supplement and amend his applications on remand.

Nothing in Article 11.07 of the Code of Criminal Procedure precludes Applicant from amending and supplementing his applications on remand. Section 4 of Article 11.07 is triggered only "after final disposition of an initial application challenging the same conviction . . . ." Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, § 4(a). There has not been a "final disposition" of Applicant's applications. Should Applicant decide to amend and supplement his applications on remand, the trial court does not have a ministerial duty to make findings of fact and conclusions of law on Applicant's new grounds or facts. "[I]t shall be the duty of the convicting court to decide whether there are controverted, previously unresolved facts material to the legality of the applicant's confinement." Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, § 3(c). Applicant's motions are denied.

Filed: December 10, 2008

Do not publish