Gaither, Ex Parte Michael Wayne, 387 S.W.3d 643

Applicant Gaither pled guilty to burglary and engaging in organized criminal activity in July 2011; sentences were ordered concurrent but stacked on a 2006 burglary sentence; plea agreement waived appellate rights.
Applicant filed an 11.07 habeas corpus application March 28, 2012 alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel for misinforming about sentences and failing to object to consecutiveness.
Trial judge found applicant understood plea terms and was satisfied with counsel; judge explained and questioned applicant about representation.
Evidentiary hearing showed counsel explained plea offer, applicant initialed the offer form, and counsel stated he never advised concurrent sentencing; objections to consecutive sentences would have been futile.
Trial court found applicant’s habeas filing false and that relief should be denied; Court of Criminal Appeals adopted supplemental findings concluding no coercion or erroneous information, and that applicant abused the writ; court ordered denial and noted stacking rule and writ-abuse consequences.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial counsel was ineffective for misinforming about sentence run-consecutively	Gaither claims coercion based on erroneous information	Gaither knew sentences would run consecutively; no coercion	No; lack of ineffective assistance; information was not erroneous
Whether failure to object to consecutive sentences was ineffective	Counsel failed to object due to misinformation	Objections would have been futile; sentences consistent with plea	No; non-misleading advice; no deficient performance
Whether applicant abused the writ by providing false information in the application	Gaither事实 claims a truthful basis	Applicant provided false information; perjury	Yes; abused the writ; relief denied and writ dismissed as frivolous and for abuse
Waiver and final disposition of the writ in light of plea terms	Waiver of appellate rights forecloses relief	Waiver valid; relief denied for frivolous filing; additional consequences apply	Denied; writ frivolous; abuse of writ confirmed

Ex parte Jones, 97 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (affirms perjury and writ-abuse principles in habeas filings)
Middaugh v. State, 683 S.W.2d 713 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (perjury and writ-abuse considerations in ex parte proceedings)
Ex parte Emmons, 660 S.W.2d 106 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) (discusses abuse of the writ and safeguards against unwarranted filings)
Ex parte Clore, 690 S.W.2d 899 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985) (relates to writ standards and conduct in habeas proceedings)
Ex parte Baker, 185 S.W.3d 894 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (precedes admonitions on writ procedures and integrity of filings)