Case Information
*1 October 26, 2015
[RICHARD GODSBY] Clements Unit 9601 SFUR 591 Amacilio, Texas 79107-9606
RECEIVED IN COURT OF CRININAL APPEALS NOV 03 2015
[RICHARD GODSBY] Tr. Ct. No. 1315052-B Wt-79,522-02
AbelAcosta, Clerk
Dear Mr. Acosta:
Enclosed please find a copy of the above named applicant's Response and And Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to be filed in the above Styled and Numbered cause. Thank you for your time in advance.
XRICHARD GODSBY Richard Goosby
CC: Harris County 230th Dist. Court District Attorney's Office
*2
Cause No. 1315052-B Ex Parte § IN THE 230th DISTRICT § COURT OF [RICHARD GOOSBY] § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
APPLICANT'S RESPONSE AND PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Applicant [RICHARD GOOSBY] files this Applicant's Response and Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, in the above-captioned cause, having been served with the State's Original Answer and Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions Law, and will show the following:
As to Applicant's First and Second Grounds Breach of Plea Agreement: There is some oversight as to the record. In State's writ Exhibit E is the Applicant's NOTICE OF APPEAL signed by the Judge and filed by the District Clark and signed by counsel for the Applicant. On Page 2 of 2 entitled the Order, the Court Orders that the Defendant's motion has been granted.
Furthermore, the Reporter's record holds, "you would be able to appeal the case once it's completed, yes, sir." (II R.R. at 13). With this language, the court lead the Applicant to believe that once the case was "completed", whether plea bargain or jury trial, that he would have a right to appeal. It is a common act to enter a conditional plea of guilty or nolo contendere, reserving the right to appeal. By the oral record and by the Notice of Appeal, and finding Applicant indigent, and ordering a record be prepared free of charge, and granting Applicant's request for appointment of appellate counsel on behalf of Applicant, shows that the court intended on granting Applicant an Appeal. The Applicant asserts in his 11.07 Application that the Appeal was a condition of his plea. And it is clear in te record that Applicant was very adamant about an appeal. He had repeated his and maintained his wish to appeal (II R.K. at 5). Breach of the Agreement.- The determination of whether a party breached a plea agreement is governed by the law of contracts. (U.S. v. harper, 643 F.3d 135, 143 (5th Cir. 2011). The Applicant is "entitled to an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the government breached oral promise", Apparent on the record. (U.S. v. Hernandez, 17 F.3d 78, 81-83 (5th Cir. 1999) -. Please be advised, Applicant has rescinded all signatures due to breach of agreement (See Notice of Recission and Cancellation attached and herein incorporated by reference). Applicant requests an evidentiary hearing to
*3
develop the record.
Mental Health History and Competency Hearing
The State claims there was an additional competency hearing on record. The locket sheet shows on 9/15/2011 an exam for competency and an exam for sanity was ordered by the court. The second motion by the new trial counsel for Examination on Competency and sanity on 5/17/2012 was illed. Yet, there is no record on the docket sheet that the court ordered the exams.
The State claims that the second Examination was the same result as the first. Yet, there is no record of a second examination or even a hearing of such. the Reporter's Record reflects that the court ordered an examination on June 11, 2012. There is no Doctor's records of such showing that the Applicant was competent to stand trial. The only evaluations the State provides are dated October 6, 2011. Applicant requests an evidentiary hearing to develop the record.
As to Applicant's Third Ground wilfurd Anderson, Court appointed trial counsel, did not inform Applicant correctly and honestly. Applicant maintains that trial counsel was not effective in his representation and violated Applicant's right to counsel. There is no evidence by affidavit or otherwise that applicant was effectively represented by wilford Anderson. Applicant request an evidentiary hearing to develop the record.
The Applicant raises questions of law and fact that cannot be resolved by the Court of Criminal Appeals upon review of the official court records without an evidentiary hearing and one should be held to resolve these issues.
The Applicant has met his burden of proof and ask for the relief requested be granted in this matter.
Certificate of Service
I, Richard Goosby, do declare under penalty of perjury that the above cupy of this instrument was sent by first class U.S.P.S. mail, postage pre-paid to the below following addresses on October 28, 2015 to the following addresses: Chris Daniel, Harris County Dist. Clerk Abei Acosta, Court Clerk P.O. Box 4651
P.O. Box 12308, CAPITOL STATION
Houston, Texas Austin, Texas 73711
Devon Anderson District Atorney 1201 Franklin St., Suite 600 Houston, Texas 77002-1923
*4
CRICHARD BOOSBYD
1793236 - BILL MERMATS UNIT
Amarillo Texas ReAldic [79167]
NOTICE OF RESCESSION AND CANCELLATION OF ALL SIGNATURES IN CASE NUMBER ISISOS2
I. Richard Goodall, a Living Sentient Man on the Land until Proven otherwise, do here by rescind for cause of unfair use of Power arisins out of the parties' relative positions and, cesultins in an unconscinnable Atreement and failure to disclose risks, Reills and responsibilities, all stanatives executed in mH natural and representative capacities in case number 1315052 , and all other offers inocuments, instwuments, and processes issued to me. Or the ERICHARD BOOSBYD in the matter of case No: 1315052. The specific contract made in this case was titled, Plea Atreement. This contract of Atreement was between ERICHARD BOOSBYD, The DISTRICT ATTORNET for HARRIS COUNTT, TEXAS, and the 230TH, DISTRICT Court in and for Harris count4, Texas. ERICHARD BOOSBYD was promised 25 years and an opportunity to Apregl. This is evidenced by the court's records with the court Reporter, for the 236th District Court and the Harris Count4 District Clerk's office. Being that a Judgment in a criminal Conviction is an action in rem, section 9 of Judiciary Act 1789, I Stat. 72 , The Moses Tailor, 4 W (oll (Us) 4 ff , the contract terms cited in the case controlled its execution.
*5 If the Purpose of the contract Law (e.g. Plaintiff and defendant and court, with all its officers) induced by Premises, (the oath and bond of executing office in their ministerial functions enforcing statues) then at some point, it becomes necessary for the courts to look at the substance (e.g. Constitution controlling application in a criminal prosecution) rather than to form (e.g. Procedural applications Particular) as applied to bar a defendant from receiving full benefits of legal protections. Suaranteed to be Provided by a government official) of the agreement and to hold that substance controls over form, "then the Parties occasionally have understandings and expectations that were so fundamental than they did not need to negotiate/raise the issue at trial about these expectations." Good faith requires a party not to violate these expectations. A. Corbin, Corbin, contracts 570. (Emphasis added). It is axiomatic that any common Person experts compliance with the stated Law by Public officials who have sworn to uphold some, let, paid to do so receive training in application of duties, and are supervised on their acts. In Alonzo Bailey, Puff, in Error, V. STATE of ALASAMAT, 219 S.C., Rept. Ed. 250 , it was held that, "Fraud violates even the most, solemn, contracts" (e.g. defendant's subject status to criminal prosecution and conversely, the official's duty to operate under the same law all the time). It was also held that, "Pandulent concealment," "1) there must be a misrepresentation of fact" (2) "the party felting on the misrepresentation, (e.g. "whom law"els and unfortuator
MOSCEOFRECESSION ANUCANCELLATIONOF ALL SUGNATURESINCASE NUWHEP ISISON2
*6 Judges expound upon law it is assumed they are knowledgeable and state it correctly. (3) That facts were or are false (e.g. execution of Judament as cuxfently administered is Outside the Score of Powers "authorized by Law") (4) The Person misrepresenting the facts intended to deceive the innocent Party (e.g. The Judge asreed to sive defendant remission to Acreal in exchange for a Guilt) Pleas, Yet, the Judge never intended on Sranthes, Permission to Acreal) (5) the innocent Party Justifiably relied upon the misrepresentation (e.g. The defendant only asreed to Plea iunder the condition he would be able to Acreal, Yet, when defendant Acrealed to the Fourteenth Court of Acreals, he was denied for Judge's failure to Srant Permission to Acreal) (6) that the innocent Party must be enriven from exercising some right, benefit or Privilese resulting from the misrepresentation (e.g. a right to be reynlated by or imprisoned under, valyd and sterilish) so, contract, some executed according to the agreement of the Parties (i.e. that the misrepresentation, shade the conscience (e.g. who would expect to believe state officials would expect to believe their can take advantage of the ignorance of the common Person by use of such a deceptive tactic, to encourage a defendant to plea to a mave and then upon breach of contract, still enforce the Judgment (8) that, the misrepresentation diminishes Public confidence in the system it is desianed to administer (e.g. what confidence could we
3 of 8
Notice of RescESSED AND CONCEILATION OF ALL STEAMATURE INCRE NUNBER 1315052
*7 held if the elements of the agreement is not complied with, then we hate a government that enters' agreements with, intentions of not comfting with the said agreements, and a malicious Forethought of comftell Performance, through deceotile Practice). as Bathority, Mr. Black, on Reseission and cancellation, 2 Ed. 1 , Vol. 1, pp. 188, 189, section 71 , "relief that be granted, on account of misrepresentation of Law or legal visits, when there is relation of trust or confidence be tween Parties." And, is Texas Law Review, pp. 133, 134, "But where one Party, who possesses superior knowledge as to law, takes advantage of the other Party's ignorance, in that respect and intentionality makes misrepresentation's concerning the law for Purposes of deceitling the other Party, and actually, succeeds in that respect, he must be held responsible for his conduct," note 2001. Especia, II, "courts enforcing Statues do not act judicially, Thompson, 154, S.E. 579 , FRC. V. G.E. 281 U.S. 469 , Keller, V. P.E. 261 U.S. 428 . No immunities, neither absolute nor limited, Protect the Judse, their employees, officers, agents, and 'co-parties' in the commission of acts of, and faith against claimant. See Am. Jur. 2nd, Volume 17 (A), clause # 298, "No immunities will protect a Person who acts in bad faith." Being that fraud is usually described as an intentional, perversion of truth for inducing another in relevance upon it to part with some valuable
*8 thins belonning to him or surrender a lesal rish. Rescession is a party's unilateral unmaking of a controt for a lesally sufficient reason such as, the other Partis breach or a Judgment rescinding the contrast; Voidance. Rescession is seneraly available as a remed y or a defense for a pan-defauting party and is accompanied by restitution of ant Partial Performance, thus restoring the parties' to their' precontractual Positions - As io termed Avoidance. E contracts 2491 C.3.5 contracts 422, 424, 427, 456, 465, 466, 484 J. The 230 th District Court in and for Harris comtly Texas did asree of the record that, if RICHARD CoosbY] did in fact Plea to the chavse of AssroNated Robbery with a deadly ueation, that ERICHARD CoosbY] would be siented frimission to Apreal, ERICHARD CoosbY], Plea No Comtest" and attempted a NOTICE of Apreal. The Fourteenth coutr of Apreals DISMISSED, the Apreal, due to trial coutr's enitered certifitation clapping that the case was a Plea baryson case, and, the defendant, has no right of Apreal, would, this have been established before the asreement, Richard CoosbY, the living sentient man would not have sished his signature. The 230 th District Court is in breach of contract and one party cannot be expected to comPI and not the other.
*9 ERICHARD COOSBY and ar Richard CoosbY the livins sentient Noun, hereby, Rescinds, Revokes, Dissolves, Cancels, and terminates all stanatures, funoertints, and any other forms of Symbols that represent the signature of the living, Sentient Man on all parrwork, including and not limited to the. Plea Atreement in case Nuviver 1315052, NUNIC PRO TUNC, for breach of contract. NOTICE: If within Thirt ( 30 ) deus of filins this document out of necessity, the state of texas and any concerned or interested Parties having NOT Provided verifiable lausful evidence to the contrary of these declarations on a point by Point basis, under the penalty of Return, having firsthand knowledge as cited. The foresons facts and TRUPIS dectayed SHALL stand as firma facta and ultimate being undisputed, and failure to respond by sientrocessuiescence SHALL BE DEEMED.
Richard Coosby, The livins, Sentient Noun by special thisitation and not a preavins senetally. CIO: #1293236-Bill clements unit 9601 SPUR 591 Ama rillo Texas [79107] I, Richard Coosby, the livins, sentient Man on the Land unfit Proven otherwise, being incorcerated in NUP. elements unit, 9601 SPUR 591, Amovillo, Texas, declare under penalty of Return that according tomy beliefs and understandins, the facts stated in this, Notice are true correct and true. E t the 288 usC 81746 ].