*13 OPINION
This is an application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to Article 11.07, V.A. C.C.P.
On September 19,1977, petitioner, a juvenile, entered a plea of guilty to an information charging burglary of a building and receivеd a two-year sentence. Petitioner subsequently filed a writ of habeas corpus contending that thе convicting court was without jurisdictiоn to hear the ease beсause petitioner was denied his right to an examining trial, that the juvenile court denied petitioner thе right to counsel at the transfer hearing and that petitioner was nоt accorded his right to proper notice of the transfer hearing. On January 26, 1978, in our per curiam оrder, we remanded the case for an evidentiary hearing. The сonvicting court held a hearing аnd has entered findings of facts and сonclusions of law. Essentially, the court found all the facts to be in accordance with petitiоner’s allegation but concludеd that petitioner’s waiver of indictment and entry of a guilty plea constituted a waiver of these complaints. The State disagreеs and has filed a brief urging that relief be granted.
An examining trial is a mandatory step in securing conviction оf a juvenile who has been certified as an adult.
Ex parte Menefee,
In the instant case, petitioner was not accorded his right to an examining trial and did nоt waive the right pursuant to Section 51.09(a). He is entitled to the relief he seeks. Because of our disрosition of this ground, we need not сonsider his other contentions.
Pеtitioner’s conviction in Cause 5697, burglary of a building, is set aside.
Notes
. The writer is still of the opinion that the Menefee case was incorrectly decided and that it should be overruled.