Sanchez, Quirino MacHin, WR-80,826-02

Quirino Machin Sanchez filed a writ of habeas corpus in 2012 under Art. 11.07, using the September 1, 2012 form version.
The Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed the writ as improper following a July 30, 2014 dismissal order.
The motion for rehearing contends the dismissal was the result of legal error and targetates Rule 73.1 and treating underlying claims versus ineffective-assistance claims.
The motion argues that Sanchez’s grounds allege meritorious underlying constitutional claims that should have been raised on direct appeal, not as multiple grounds on one page.
The motion seeks rehearing, withdrawal of the original opinion, and merits-based consideration, alleging defective transmission of Sanchez’s objections to findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The opposing party is identified as Luis Gonzalez (Edinburg, Hidalgo County).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether dismissal rested on proper Rule 73.1 handling	Sanchez’s underlying claims and IAC claims were missegregated	Court properly treated grounds on a single page	Dismissal error; underlying claims should be separable and considered on merits
Whether underlying meritorious claims were forfeited	Meritorious constitutional claims should have been raised on direct appeal	Claims forfeited if not raised on direct appeal	Should be addressed on merits; forfeiture analysis depends on proper pleadings
Whether IAC claims require underlying merit shown on face of record	IAC claims require demonstrating trial errors with arguable merit	Defendant can prevail by showing lack of meritorious underlying errors	Standard should permit review of merits of underlying claims; not barred by form of grounds
Whether procedural form errors tainted habeas pleading	Pleadings alleged multiple meritorious grounds properly within form	Rule 73.1 prohibits multiple grounds on one page	Procedural defect should not preclude merits review; underlying claims should be separable
Whether relief should be granted to consider merits	Motion for rehearing should be granted to reconsider on merits	Court should adhere to prior dismissal	Grant rehearing and decide merits per timely objections

Ex parte Gardner, 959 S.W.2d 189 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998) (habeas corpus not substitute for direct appeal; forfeiture if issue could have been raised on appeal)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two-prong standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Ex parte Lozada-Mendoza, 45 S.W.3d 107 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (requirements to prove ineffective assistance claims in habeas)
Hooks v. Roberts, 780 F.2d 1196 (5th Cir. 1983) (need underlying trial errors with merit for IAC claims)
Ex parte Miller, 330 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (ineffective appellate counsel claims require meritorious underlying issue)
Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465 (1986) (state court failures to review Fourth Amendment claims may be barred in federal habeas)
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (due process regarding suppression and disclosure of exculpatory evidence)
Ex parte Goodman, 816 S.W.2d 383 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (forfeiture if issue not raised on direct appeal)