of review and reaching its conclusion, the majority does not address whether the trial court abused its discretion in light of evidence in the record. See Kniatt, 206 S.W.3d at 664 (setting out discretionary standard of review of order denying habe-as corpus). Nor does the majority give weight to the trial court’s statutory right to rely on its own personal recollection of the prior proceedings in making its determination of whether habeas corpus relief should be granted. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.072 § 6(b). Thus, the majority fails to consider the stipulations and waivers in the record, or any of the documents in the record other than appellant’s and Sanchez’s affidavits, which appellant attached to his application for writ of habeas corpus. Cf. Kniatt, 206 S.W.3d at 664 (<HOLDING>); Phuong Anh Thi Le, 300 S.W.3d at 327
holding that appellate court can uphold a trial courts ruling on any ground appearing in the record whether urged in the trial court or not holding court of appeals was to review facts in light most favorable to trial courts ruling even when no witnesses testified and all evidence was submitted in written affidavits holding that appellate court reviewing trial courts habeas corpus ruling must review record evidence in light most favorable to ruling and uphold ruling absent abuse of discretion holding that in reviewing trial courts ruling on habeas corpus petition reviewing court must defer to all of trial courts implied factual findings supported by record holding that in ruling on a summaryjudgment motion record evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable to nonmovant