This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus which was transmitted to this Court by the clerk of the trial court pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07, V.A.C.C.P. Ex Parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated assault, and punishment was assessed at sixty-five years imprisonment. Applicant's conviction was affirmed on appeal. Welch v. State, No. 14-99-01144-CR (Tex. App.- Houston [14th Dist.], delivered April 5, 2001, no pet.).

Applicant contends that his appellate counsel was ineffective for not informing him of the disposition of his case on appeal and of his right to file a petition for discretionary review, thereby denying him an opportunity to file a petition for discretionary review.

In Ex parte Wilson, 956 S.W.2d 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997), we held that for counsel to render effective assistance on appeal, he must inform the client that the case has been affirmed and that the client can pursue discretionary review on his own. The trial court made findings that the Applicant had not been informed that his case had been affirmed on appeal or that he could pursue discretionary review on his own. The record supports the trial court's findings.

Therefore, Applicant is entitled to relief. The proper remedy is to return Applicant to the point at which he can file a petition for discretionary review. He may then follow the proper procedures in order that a meaningful petition for discretionary review may be filed. For purposes of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, all time limits, including mandate, shall be calculated as if the Court of Appeals' decision had been rendered on the day the mandate of the Court in this cause issues. We hold that should Applicant desire to seek discretionary review, he must take affirmative steps to see that his petition is filed in the Court of Appeals within thirty days after the mandate of this Court has issued.

DELIVERED: April 9, 2003

DO NOT PUBLISH