Hardeman, Willie Eugene

Case Information

ORIGINAL In The CATT OF CARMENAL APPERALS AUSTEH, TEXAS

RECEIVED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPERALS

FEB 172015

WILlLE EvGENE HARDENAN V8

RETURNER, THE STATE OF TEXAS

FROM P EPEERL NO. 5 09-13-00461-RR, 09-13-00468-CR, 09 - 13 - 00469 - COURT OF CRIMINAL APPERALS TRAAL CANSE NO. 5 10-10318, 10 - 10380, 10 - 10382, SESTERSON COURT, TEXAS

RETURN FOR DISCRETOMARY REVLEN,

PREFER FOR RETITONER,

PETTIONER - PRO SE WILlLE EvGENE HARDENAN TOLS-ID HUMBER 1891985 ORAL MElowethi Requested IN HREITING, 3 JESTER ROND RECHIMOND, TEXAS 191406

To The Honorable Subbes of The Court of Eerminial Apeens, Shremerif legbarbinb orai arbumenf in watienb as reguxed by Rule 39.1 a Riedif to orai arbumenf.

The minith court of Apeens also erred when the court held that they did not need to address the merits of issues raised in wille Evde. EHERMANn vs the state of Texas Pro se Brief Just because the court of Eerminial Apeens sikted that in Bledsof vs state, 1785 w. 30.324 , 42 b. 27 (tex. ERIM. App. 2005 ), even both this is a case where some constructionally protecter Riedif Has been isolated, resulting in a fundamentallly virgant Plem BARbam. The Petitioner, wille Eubene Hameman, challende the minith court of Apeens dection in his case by Ytienb a petition for ossertionary REVEN. See, tex. R. MP. Rule 168. Rather, the court of Eerminial Apeens may determine that arbuable persons for appeal exist and demand the cause to the teral court so that new counsel may be appointed to Brief the issues. See, wellie Evdane Hameman vs state, Pro se RESpense Brief, (TEx. 9 DISI. 20 H ) theretore it is necessary to order Apporiment of new counsel to re-berf the Apeens because there are arbuable pozitio of Eeror in this case which is Reversible Eeror, due Prereess clause, ${14}^{\text{TH}}$ Amendment, a neffectivc assistance of counsel, $6^{\text{TH}}$ Amendment, MeHial incompetent, crev and unusual Punishment, $8^{\text{TH}}$ Amendment, a Swissnish without, (evidence), Texas Habil yAL Eerminial act, (VERbONS ANH. P.C. ACt. 63 ), Texas Peral code act, IX. 42, first de bace Polany Punishment.

Petitioner -Pro se Oral arbumenf required in watienb,

To The Honorable Judges of The Court of Cardinal Appens,

Statement Rehandling Oral Argument as Required By Rule 39.1 and Rule 39.1 A Report To Oral Argument,

The Petitioner, with a Evidene Inaiderant, is detine unumfully ReSlarated of His Liberty and Life from a unjusi Convection Judgment and Sentence in and for the 252 Disfrect Court of Iefferent County, Texas Rea sponto Judge, unjusi Layne waher, decrease the Petitioner with a return under the exdomstance because there are sev en verhuate demands of error such as merial incompetent, ineffective assistance of eounes, 6" Amendment, or errocess clause, 14" Amendment, Texas HABITUAL EXPERIM. AL ACT, P.C. REF. 63 Texas Pehal Lode and 12.42, a 5 -monthly refidence, and unisual, Pursuant, 8" Amendment, the Petitioner can return fictif from the conviction in the unjustiteal court because Judge Layne waher, Disfrect Aternely PERRY Thomas, and Aftomly Thomas S. Burdank all conipre ed interest the Petitioner from the document of the case because Aftomly Thomas S. Burdank ceere the Petitioner to such for a Tanyear Problem that He winn' eflectable for by him under the Texas HABITUAL EXPERIMAL ACT, P.C. REF. 63 and the Petitioner Aftomly Thoma S. Burdank Knew Th of His direct the mentally competent to accept a free Predeem Just as well as Judge Layne waher, and Disfrect Aftomly PERRY Thomas Puss, the Petitioner Had a 5 -monthly refidence in court Stafting that He Had nottend to do with the cause 14" In his case 5 tion by Dramm who deease He said that He comfted the cause's by himself, and asothe Petitioner Staft in the motion To Devote Problem that of Taus and Sentence In that He wanted a July trial to prove His Actual Innovent of for the unjust Judge La yne waher asked the Petitioner DED He winn a July trial. Honorable Judges of the court of Cardinal appens that is a Evide when some constitional Ly Protested ReGUT' Has been veblished, deducting in a Fundamentally univer of the Exdomstion in the 252nd Disfrect Court of Iefferent County, Texas ReaSPO-

In The Coast of Carminal Appeals Austin, Texas

WILlLE EUGENE HARDEMAN us The State of Texas

From appeal no. 109-13-004b7-c8 09-13-004b8-c8 09-13-004b9-c8 TOTAL CAUSE No. ${}^{1}10-10378$ $10-10380$ 10- 10382 Jefferson County, Texas

The Petitioner, WILlLE EvGene Hardeman, Merital Incompetent, to the Honorable Subbes of the coast of Carminal appeals,

The following persons have an interest in this case in the extent of their respective registrations, and this of these facts of the case is made in order that the Subles of the coast of carminal appeals may evaluate the conflicts of interests.

WILlLE EvGene Hardeman, Petitioner - Page 56 Thomas J. durbank, Department, Texas T1101.

First MIVRnEy for The PettronsA.

PERRY THORNE, ASSESSING DISTRICT MITORNEY, 1001 PERAL, 3RD FLOOR, BEAUYOND, TEXAS TITOL. COUNSEL FOR THE STAKE (CULTI INNOCEMEE AND SCHIEVLENNE)

SHELEM SHIMMERLTH, 3800 PARK LAME, PART MATHUR, TEXAS TTD 42. MIVRnEY FOR THE POTTIONER BEFORE ABPEAL (CULTI INNOCEMEE AND SCHIEVLENENE)

MRS. JEANI LEBLAME A COMMUNITY SUBERVISION OFFICER FOR SEEFFEASON COURTly, TEXAS

UNIUSI JUBEZ LAYNE WALKER, 252 MD DISTRICT CART, SEEFFEASON UNITI, TEXAS TREAL CART JUBEZ.

TACIS OF THE CASE,

ON FEBRUARY 13, 2012 THE POTTIONER PLED CULTIY To SAID OFFENSE. IN THE INDECIMENT BECAUSE HIS APPOSITED COUNSEL INIENITCHally AND KNOW IMBly TO BE VERY INEFFECTIVE BY MARCHE A PLED BARBARA FOR THE POTTIONER FOR A TID YEAR WALDJUBEARTON PROGRESEN KNOWtME THAT HIS CLIENT WAS MENIMLY IN COMPETENT TO MECEPIT A PLGA BARBARA AND THE COURT DETERAED ALL FURTHER PROCEDURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 42.12 C.E. P. SECTION 3D WITHOUT ENTERINE AN MOLUSTEATTON OF CULTI.

THE POTTIONER, WILLE E WGENE HARBERANN, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO YOU AND YOUR HONORABLE PESTTON AS THE JUBGES OF THE COURT OF EALMITHAL ABPEALS, I SWEAR TO WATTE NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SOHELP NEE CSOD.

THE PETITONER WAS IN COMPETENT TO STAND A MOTION TO REVOKE PROBATTON. HENRTHG AND SENTENCING OUT, HIS APPORTED COUNSEL MS. SUMMERLIN WAS VERY IN EFFECTIVE AS THE PETITONER COUNSEL, AND THE PRODUCTER ^[14] BE COAD MOTION TO REVOKE PROBATTON HENRTHG + SENTENCING WILL SHON THE HENORABLE. COURT THAT HEA PERFORMANCE WAS DEFFICIENT AND THE DEFFICIENCY PRESUSI. CED THE PETITONER, WILLIER EUGENS HARRERMAN, SEE EXHIBIT'S, M.H AND MOTION TO REVOKE PROBATTON HENRTHG + SENTENCING, PRODUCTER ^[15] BE COAD, P6'S. b, II11,21-22, 25-30,33, PLUS THE PETITONER, WILLIER EUGENS HARDEMAN, REQUIRED FOR HIS APPORTED COUNSEL MS. SUMMERLIN TO REFERAT HIS MEDICAL AND ME. WIAL REGARD FROM THE V. A. BUT TO KNOW PRESALL. SEE, WENESEL US STRELAMP. 9 DIST. 2005) 115 SUN. 30.500, DEFFICIENT PERFORMANCE. THIS HONORABLE CAST THE SU. BISDUCtion UNGER ARTICLE 39 OF THE TEXAS CODE OF CAZMONAL PROCEDURE, ART. I, SECTION 10 OF THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION, AND THE BURTH (B ${}^{\text{TH}}$ ) AND THE UNHUMBUNENT OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, AND THE AMERICAN WITH DISABILITY ACT. SECTION 503 OF THE ACT OF 1934, REVUEE HAD ADA. THE PETITONER, WILLIER EUGENS HARDEMAN, WELTIAL STREET OF DESTIN AT THE TIME OF HIS MOTION TO REVOKE PROBATTON HENRTHG AND SENTENCING ON OCTOBER 14, 2013 WAS THEOM-patient to stand THAT HENRTHG, AND THE PETITONER DON'T REMEMBER ANY OF THE MOTION TO REVOKE PROBATTON HENRTHG AND SENTENCING DUE To HIS MENTHAL StRE. SEE, MOTION TO REVOKE PROBATTON HENRTHG AND SENTENCING, PRODUCTER ^[16] BECOAD, P6S. b, II-11, 21-22, 25-30,33, AND EXHIBIT'S M.H. THE PETITONER, WILLIER EUGENS HARDEMAN, ILLWESS CONSTIT OF DISQUAR DISORDER, MANA DEPRESSION, SENTIOL DEFFECTIVE, AND MCIAL DISORDERS. THE PETITONER, WILLIER EUGENS HARDEMAN, ALSO THERM HIS APPORTED COUNSEL MS. SUMMERLIN THAT HE HAD BEEN HISTITALYE AT THE V.A. HISTITAL FOR ONE WEEK AND A MALE UNDER SURGEORG WATCH, AND HE V.A. MENTHAL RECURS COULD. PRAVE THAT BUT, HIS APPORTED COUNSEL MS. SUMMERLIN DISUN' ACT ON HIS FORM OR ON HIS INFORMATION, AND MS. JEANE LEO\|AWIC A COMMUNITY SEPTELVESOR OF EFFICER FOR JEFFICYSON CONDly, TEXAS PROBATTON OFTICE ALSO NEW THAT THE PETITONER, WILLIER EUGENS HARDEMAN, WAS IN THE V.A. HOSPITAL

FOR DANE TREATMENT AND WEBER A SUICIDE WRICH FOR TWO MORTHS. THE PETITOONER, HELLEE EULEGNE HARDBERNAN, WAS HARMED WHEN THE PROSECULAR. THE APPA. HIED CONGREL MA. THOMAS S. BURDANN, AND THE UNIUST 252 "D DISTRIGT E ANT, SEFFER. SON COURT, TEXAS LAYNE WALKER JUNGE PROSCOENE FARLED To CONDUCT A COMPETENCY HEMATHE. S.G.G, CARTER vs JOHNSON, 131 F. 30452,454, N. 10 (5th CER.1447) ET. TENE PARK vs RODINSON, 383 U.S. $375,825.17\mathrm{.836},15$ L. 20.20 .815 ,) THE 252 "D DISTR. 18T EALTH, SEFFERSON COURT, TEXAS UNIUST LAYNE WALKER JUDGE PROSCOENE DED NOT NOT WITHIN THE QUE PROCESS POUCHDARIES IN THE PETITONER COMPETENCY BECAUSE THE UNIUST COURT WAS BEING PIRS TO HOLD A IN COMPETENCY HEMATHE. S.G.G, JOHN SON vs SANGER, 120 F. 30, 1301, 1333, (5TH CER.1447) ABOXHTED CONGREL, IN THE LOWER OF PERFORMING HIS OFFICIAL DUTY AS THE PETITONER EALTH APP. OXITED ATTONARY DED NOT EXPERISE THE USE OF HIS SKILLS DILENTLY AS THE PETITONER ^[13] ATTONARY. ATTONARY DURBANN, THE SEFFERSON COURT, TEXAS PROSECULAR, AND THE UNIUST 252 "D DISTRIGT EALTH, SEFFERSON COURT, TEXAS LAYNE WALKER JUDGE PROSCOENE GARDS HOLDLEENECK ON FEBRUARY 13, 2012 WHEN THEY KNOW THAT THE PETITONER WAS IN COMPETENT To StAND TOTAL OR TAKE A PLED BARBANN. APPAIIED ATTON. NÉY, THE PROSECULAR, AND UNIUST LAYNE WALKER JUDGE PROSCOENE MAE NOT A KNOWIN EXPERT PAPERIATRISI HOR A KNOWN EXPERT PAPERIAD DIST AND THEY DO NOT POSSES THE EXPERTISE To SAY IS THE PETITONER WAS COMPETENT OR NOT DEEME THAT THE UNIUST 252 "D DISTRIGT EALTH, THE PROSECULAR, HOR THE PETITONER APPAIIED ATTONARY HAD THE PETITONER, HELLEE EULEGNE HARDBERNAN, EVALUATED BY A LIEEN. S.G.G PAPERIATRISI IN THE SEFFERSON COURT, TEXAS SAIL DEGORG THE PETITONER PLED EALTTY To SAID OFTENGE ^[15] IN THE INDICAMENT, WHERE WAS PGCQUARD BY LAN.

WILLEE EULEGNE HARDBERNAN, TOU'S-TD 1891985 JESTER III UNIT 3 JESTER RAND RICHMOND, TEXAS 111406

Subject Index

Indirect of Parties and Council 3

| Authorities and Adiovent | $16-24$ | | :-- | --: | | Statement of the case | $7-14$ | | Comuns for Acicr? | 5 | | Statement of the Facts | $14-16$ | | ExHiclet ^[15] | 27 | | Centricate of compliance with Rule 9.4 | 26 | | Centericate of Sodvica | 25 | | Conclusion and Rnyca | 26 | | McMORANOUM Opinion | 27 | | CARL arDUMENI | 1 | | MERial inCompetent | 1 | | DRIEf for PetitioneA | 4 |

IDENTICY OF PARTICLES AND COHNSELS

WASHANN'T To TEX. 8. App. 38.1 (W), PETETCONER CERTIFIES THAT THE FOLLOWERED PERSONS MAY HAVE AN INIEREST IN THIS CASE TO THE EXTENT OF THEIR RESPETTIVE DESCRIPTIONS, AND THIS CERESTICLATION IS MAKE IN ORDER THAT THE PRESIDING SUObes MAY EVALUATE THE CONTECTS OF INIERESTS.

WILLIE EUbENE HINDBE MANN PETETCONER - PRO SE

THE SHARE OF TEXAS

TERRENCE LEAH HOLMES, 455 MILAM, BEAUMONI, TEXAS 77701 MTEANEY FOR THE PETITONER ON APPEAL.

THANAS J. DURBANK, BEAV MONT, TEXAS 77701 TEST MTEANEY FOR THE PETITONER,

RODHEY D. LONERLY, MSSUSINN'T CERMENAL DISTRISI MTEANEY, JEFFERSON COUNIY, COURT HOUSE, BEAUMONI, TEXAS 77701 COUNSEL FOR THE SHRE of TEXAS ON APPEAL.

PERRY THOMAS, MSSUSINN'T DISTRISI MTEANEY, 1001 PENAL ST, 3AD FLOOR, BEAU MONT, TEXAS 77701 COUNSEL FOR THE SHRE (COULI' (THHOSENCE AND SERIENCING)

SHERCH SUMMERLYN, 38DD PARK LAWG, PORT ARTHUR, TEXAS 77642 MTEANEY FOR THE PETETCONER BEFORE APPEAL (COULI' (THHOLENCE

AND Sentiments)

Sudbe Layne Walker, 252nd distater court, Jefferson county, Texas Tatal court Jubbe.

In The
Court of Criminal Appetits
Austin, Texas

WELLIe EUBENE HARDENNA

45
Petitioner,
The State of Texas

From Appéal No. ^[15] 09-13-00451 -CR, 09 - 13-00468 - CR, 09 - 13-00469 - CR, TREAL ENASE NO. ${}^{5}10-{103}^{\circ }18$ 10 - 10380 10 - 10382

Brief For Petitioner,

C.

Copanus for Relief

1. Mental Incompetent.
2. Ineffective Assistance of counsel, $8^{\text{TH}}$ Amendment.
3. Due Process Cause, ${14}^{\text{TH}}$ Amendment.
4. Cruel Amb unusual Punishment, $8^{\text{TH}}$ Amendment.
5. Texas Penal Code Act. 12.49, First Decree Polany Punishment.
6. Texas Uninlual Criminal Act, (vernon" Ann. P.e. Act. 83).
7. A Swoñino Affidmert, (Entidence).

To The Honorable Jubbes of The Court of Criminal Appents,

WILLIAM RUSSENE HARDBEMA, PETITONER FROM NAPERAL NO. 04-13-00461 -CR, 04-13-00468-CR, 04-13-00469-CR, AND IN LALVE NO. 10-10318, 10-10380, 10-10382, IN THE 252nd DISTRICT LAAT, SEFERSON CASTE, TEXAS, LAYHE WALKER JUBbe PRESSELNG, AND PETITONER FOR THE CAAT OF CRINIHAL Appents, RESPETIALLY BUIMITS THIS PETITON FOR DISERETZONARY RATEN TO THE CAAT FOR THE CAAT FOR THE PUBpose of Appentand. HIS WILLIAM CONVETTIONS OF DURBHAY OF HABIBITON, ABGRANIZED KIDHAPPINE, ABGRANIZED RUSSEN Y.

FOR CONVERTENCE, THE PARTIES WILL BE REFERED TO US PETITONER NIVO THE SUBE.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE.

Cerecting, with all Dus Respect To you and your Honorable Postion as the Case of Crenrinal Appens Jus be's, I Smear To write Helfand but the PaVin so Help me look.

The Petitioner, willie Evibent Hardeman, is deting unumfully Rest. Rensbed of His Lrderity and Life From a UnJust Convection, Jub bment and Sertence In and for The ${252}^{\text{nd}}$ Destart Court of Jefferson County, Texas ? Resutring Jus be, Layne Walker.

issues Resented.

There are seven adbuable Poinls of ERROA, Fundamentals of the. Rnss, youn which the Petitioner can obtain Relief from the Convection's in and for the ${252}^{\text{nd}}$ Destart Court of Jefferson County, Texas

This is an appeal from No's 09-13-00467-C2, 09-13-00468-C2, 09-13-00469-C2, and In Cause No. 10 - 10378 , 10 - 10380 , 10 - 10382 , in the ${282}^{\text{nd}}$ Destart Court, Jefferson County, Texas for Burialary of Hastation, ABS Ravited Robbery, AbGravated Kiznappinls. On feebrary 13,2012, The Petitioner had Dusly in Snd offence's in the Indisctment in which was void and none because forall the Texas Renal case art. 12.42 State's Firsis DunsHmend for Abderavated Robbery, AGBRA vated Kiznappinls, Burialary of Hastation is as Followinls. (A) An Indisctural Abjubbed Dusly of a Felsory of the First Deb. Re shall be Purshed By Imprisonment In the Texas Deyertment of Crenrinal Justice for Life of for any term or not more than

44 years or Less than 5 years. (8) In addition To Impersonment, in InDey DUAL ADJUSTED UNITIY OF A FELony of the First DEGREE MAY BE PHISMED By A FINE NOT To EXEED 10,000 Dollars. (2) TEXAS PENAL CODE ARTIL. 42. RENATIEs FOR REPORTS AND HABITUAL FELNY ATTENDERS STABS, (C) 110 IF IT IS SHOWN ON THE TREAL OF A FAST DEGREE FELNY THAT THE DEPENDANT HAS BEEN ONCE BEFORE CONVICIED OF A FELony, ON CONVESTION HE SHALL BE PHISMED By IMPERSONMENT IN THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CERMENAL JUSTICE FOR LIFE, OR FOR ANY TERM OF NOT MORE THAN 49 YEARS OR LESS THAN 15 YEARS IN ADDITION To Impersonment, IN INDEVEDUAL MAY BE PHIISMED BY FINE NOT TO EXEED 10,000 Dollars. (3) TEXAS HABITUAL CERMENAL STATIFIC (VE RHEN ^[5] ANN. P.C. ART. 63 ), SAIS ^[15] IT IS REQUIRED FOR THE TREAL LEGAT IS SENTENCE A DEPENDANT TO LIFE IMPERSONMENT UPON A THIRD CONVESTION, AND UNDER STATIFIC ENVIRONING PENALITIES FOR REPORTS AND HABITUAL OFTEN. DEAS PHIISIMENT IS MISOLVIFLEY FIXED, AND TREAL COURT CANNOT ISOMQUE STATURE AND ASSESS PRODATION. SEE, SAIS vs KERSH (APP. 14 DIST. IARA) 2 S.W. 30.636, RETIION FOR DISERCTIONARY REVIEW DRAHTED. (4) THE TREAL COURT ERROR IN DEVING THE RETIIONER A PRODATION UNDER THE REVISION OF HABITUAL CERMENAL STATIF, (VERNOW ^[5] ANN. P.C. ART. 63 ) SEE, CARTER VS SAIS (CR. APP. 1415 ) 521 S.W. 246. AND ALSO, DUE To THE FACT MA.DANON AR. 05, D.O.B. 1-3-1461, SEQUATIY NUMBER 463-381-111 MADE A PLED OF DUIL. LY IN AND FOR THE 252 NO DISTRUCT COURT OF JEFFERSON UNITY. TEXAS PAPS. SIZING JUBE, LAYNE WATHER, FOR BUR GUARY OF HABITATION, A DEMANIEDO ROBERTY, ABLRAVAIED KIDNEPPLUE BECAUSE HE WAS UNITY AS CHARDE - AND THE COURT ASSESSED A 10 YEAR SEGTENCES ON EXCH CHARDE TO RUH CO HOURENT IN THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CERMENAL JUSTICE - INSTITUTIONAL DEVISION AND MR. DANON ARDS ALSO STARED IN A AFFEDANT THAT THE PETITIONER, WILLIE EUbENE HARDEMAN, HAD NOTHING To DO WITH HES ACTIVO OU OR ABOUI SEPTEMBER 1, 2010, SEE EXHIBIT ONE + TWO AND EXHIBIT'S R. THROUGH F. AND EXHIBIT'S ID THROUGH F. AND RE.

Petitroner, while Evbene Handeman, appointed counsel Initiation A Lly, ANd Krowcnbly Let The Petitroner Red Ductty to chardee Thart He Oedn' Commut for a 10 year unadjusted Probatron. The PetEtioner Had been in The Jefferson County Jast for 18 months. The Pet. Itoner was Actual A Innocent Person, And He was mentiel ine ompetent to make any Pled at that temo, And His appetited coun- SEL Knew It. See Exhient ^[15] MII ANd EXHIEtI MOTON To Revoke Probatron HENrinde &; Sententing, Reporter ^[6] Record, PoS. 2, 11-11, 21,-22, 25, 30,33, SeG, ExParte nesley Ronald Tulay 109 S.W. 30.388 , (TeX.CRIm. App. 2002) wret Erenited, Clatm of Actual Innocence with Affubart wHz eH Constitated Affirmative Evidence of the Petitioner Innocen- C&;, Such That no Rational Suay would conuct The Petitioner In Light of the Evtponce. Ex Parte FrankLan, 12 S.W. 30. 611, 615, (TeX.CRIm. App. 2002) (exTynls ScHlup vs DeLo, 513 U.S. 298,314,115 S.C. 851,130 L. ED. 20. 808, (1995). Eltionoo, 941 S.W. 20. et 208, Incarceration of An Innocent Person offends Federal Dve Protes, Therefores A Rare InNocence Clatm Rareses A Constitution Al chALLENCE To The Convict-ION. The Petitioner Adequately cause ANd RecIudice. In EFFECTIVE PESTItANCE OF CONSEL Constitutes cause for failure to Rars e e eHtALLENCE. See, DQ yLE vs vUTTED States, 121 F. 20.1195, 1198-99, (9TH CIR. (983). The Petitioner will shan The Honorable court in this Brief IneE Facts of the Petitioner Beends Deny EFFECTIVE PESTItance of Coursel with was a violation of the Petitioner b"MANCHMENT of the United States con stitution Decayes His Appointed Counsell, MR. Bu. RBAH ^[16] Petitioner ALE was DEFECTENT ANd The before enly RecIudicEd. The Initiationt All Gies that the Oftense Bur blary of HARTTATTON, a Gloronaled RobBery, a Golonaried HrDnHPPEND occur de D on or ABout September 1, 2010. The Petitioner ANd MR. DANON ARDS WENt To The Complacinnat House To Seare Some Druce, AND whEN

The Petitioner Knocked on the Front door Mr. Dannon ards Heck The Co mPLAINANT ^[15] Front door Enb, And Foree The Petitioner into The Comp LAINANT ^[16] Home of Doun Point, And The Petitioner Asked them is the same CArty ^[17] , And He Told The Petitioner To Be Quet, And Mr. Dannon ards Be. Even To Demand Drude ^[18] And Money From The ComPLAINANT ^[19] At Doun Point And The Complaninant ^[20] Lervg Mr. Dannon ards what He Had, And Mr. Dannon ards started looking Every where for more money and drive ^[21] , And The Petitioner Asjme that He found Some Inpe, And He Beliven To Tre The Complaninant of, And The Petitioner stayed Lnyeride on the Floor w. Ith The ComPLAINANT. It seGm Like Mr. Dannon ards use ^[22] The Petition NER To Take Hymover To The Complaninant ^[23] Home To RoD Hym, And I, The Petitioner ^[24] Dron't Have An, Think To Do with it, And The Petitioner Did Dn't Have Known Idea That Mr. Dannon ards was Looing To Commit A CR. Ime, And The Petitioner Told His ApporTed Country, And The Not So Houserly JuDbe, Layne Walker, And Smeltow The Petitioner was CHARLE WITH Three Usual схеме ^[25] Such as a Grangered Robbery, a GrAa vated Kew Appizule. And Bur blary of HARTTation. And, on or About September 1, 2010 The Petitioner Had been a victim of a stroke some more before September 1,2010 And He was usiug a four Pornilcane, And The Petitioner Recht fool was in a Brade of That Time, And The Petitioner Had known use ^[26] of His REEHT HAND of all Decades From HARING To Stroke It Left His REEHT HAND Completely DrsAble, And Asso The Petitioner Had other DESERTUty From Havinde a Stroke That His EErthes ^[27] will EYQLATE AND SUPPORT ^[28] A.B.C, D.E, F, on February 13, 2012 The Petitioner Red Guilty To SeeD GTEENAE ^[29] In The InDictionent PecAUses His ApporTed Country. In Tentionally And KnownlMy To Be very Ineffective By mAlkly? Pled BARBARL For The Petitioner for a 10 year unADSuBtLATION No OrION KnownH6 That His client was Mentally InCOMPETENT

To accept a great par ban in a court defereed all further بم 11,200. Pra eceatings in reference with article 42.12 C. C. P. section 30 without entering an adjustment of trust. The Petitioner was accrual innocence of all charge's. The appointed counsel knew that the Petitioner was a victim of the matter because the Petitioner was a possble person with many, many, Handicap, on September 1,2010. See, $E_1{H}_1{R}_1{T}^1{P}_1$ A, $P_1,D_1,E_1,F_1$ one and ^[1] Two, and extract ^[13] M. H. The appointed counsel knew that the Petitioner had been in the reference county and for 18 months for these unsust charge. The appointed counsel knew that the Petitioner had a snormen 6 effectors on the perish status that the Petitioner had nolumn 6 to do with the crime committed on September 1,2010 by Mr. DANON were action, and Mr. DANON was 2012. In the case of 16 years on exact charge to run concurrent in the Texas Department of Crestrial Justice institution out of the 252nd octa-101 edfereson county, Texas unjust Layne Walker, Jude Pezzati 2016, and also the appointed counsel knew that the 252nd octa-101 edfereson county, Texas error by deferent in the record and, and directly the Petitioner on a 18 year unabjubration Probatron in which was a violation of the Texas penal code met. 12.42, and the Tex-134.43 maritual crestrial act (verso 134.43 min. P.C. met. 63). See, under the maritual felony of erder selferyre, Stafy, Senlence is imposed to reflect the seriousness of a defendant. Most recent offenses, not as if StANes Alane, but in effect of error offenses. See, extracti 10. 18, 2001, 253. 12, 2001, 555. 12, 3001, on demand and winc. 10. 18, 2001, 2001, 246. 32, 3001, the Tera L. court had no military in one the Petitioner a unubtention Proba-134.43 from because his sentence was not a ullovered by Law, the Petitioner, with a 1.2. Exile 10.4, Harbeman, Confends that the Petitioner was

Assistance of His counsel RejJDled Hem Decause He wouldnot Have Plended Courty if His Attorney would Have Been in the Best Interest of His Case. See, Thoms vs United States, 27 F.30.321326, (8TH Ctr. 1994). And Also, The Petitioner was cluismed Actual InNocelesc, and His Appointed CounscL was deficient and deficicency RejJDled In His Repressionistion. See, HerRera vs Coluna, the 119 S.C. 953 , ( 1993 ) And, The EJENTH Amendment ProDiction Alatnst CrueL And Unusual Punishment, and The Fourteenth Amendment DUE Proces Guarded Therefore Forbid the Petitioner unjust Convection. He Supporled Thes Cluism with a deficiant Tendene To 9. Han That He Haben committed The Crime, The Petitioner stated His Actual Innocence Cluism, and the Superiord Affidavit in the 252nd DIS. TRECT count, 1 effection County, Texas unjust Layne wailer, Judue Presi. 10thl And His Appointed CounscL was deficient and, Deficicenc). RejJDled onec AcontrYederaL Habeas Counts, Erisure that In DiVIOUALLS are not Impressioned In Vealation of the Conscription. See, Muose vs Denyscy, 261 U.S. 84, 81-88, 43 S.C. 265-266, 671 L.ED. 549. Also, The Petitioner Federal Constitutional cluism considered on the MERITs if He makes a Paper Stomend of Actual Innocence. See, 9 mover vs Whiteley, 505 U.S. 330,112 S.C. 2514,120 L.ED. 20.264 . See, United States vs Ceramides etic as 188 S. 30.343 , (e.t. 1999) Petitioner Apporled, The count of Appela Head Thntul. Petitioner was RejJDled by CounscL, Unipun tL. L. ERnly with Sentimentary Confidence and Failure To CliALLENCE. (2.) count of Appens Had Authoraty To Revien Thes 1550 , Sunsporte, For Plan Eeror, Reviened And Remanbed. Also see, where he vs state (pp. 9 DIST. 2009 ) 115 S.W. 30.500, Defict EnT Performance. on oCoder 14, 2013 The count convined for a Heorink on a motion To Revoke UnabJudieRled protection. The unjust count ReDiled the Petitioner, unabJudieR IEd. protection Deferred The Frndink and Assessed His Punishme-

NITAT Severity Fave (15) yemAs confinement in the INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION. The PEtitioner WAS INCOMPETENT To Stand A MOTION To REVIOME PROBATTON HENRIDG AND SEVIPENCEND DUI, HIS Appointed LANCEL MS. 5 UMMERLLD WAS VERY INEFFECTIVE AS THE PETITIONER LANCEL, AND THE EXH. IPOIT ^[3] WELL SIGN THE HONOR WALK COURT THAT HEA PERFORMANCE WHE DETTENT AND THE DETTENT E ENCY PREIUDYCED THE PETITIONER. SEE EXHIBIT ^[15] , M.H A. NO EXHIBIT MOTION To REVIOME PROBATTON HENRIDGt SEVIPENCEND, REPORTER ^[5] RECORD, P65.6, 11-11, 21-22, 25-30,33,1566, MENEFEE vs STAIS (pp. 9 DIST 2005 ) 1155 W. 3050 , DEETENT PERFORMANCE. THIS HONORWALG COURT WAS JURISDITION UNDER ARTICLE 39 of THE TEXHS LODE OF CRITTENAL PROCEDURE, A. Rt. 1, Section 10 of THE TEXHS CONSTITUTION, AND THE SURTH (LTM) AND THE H ${}^{\text{TH}}$ ANANDMENT OF THE UNITED SUBT E CONSTITUTION, AND THE AMERICAN WITH D. ISABILITY ACT. SECTION 503 of THE ACT OF 1964, REVISE PRO ADA. THE PETITIONER MENIAL SUBT OF BEEVIG AT THE TIME OF HIS MOTION To REVIOME PROBATTON HENRIDG AND SEVIPENCEND ON DETOBER 14, 2013 AS INCOMPETENT TO ST. PHO THAT HENRIDG, AND THE PETITIONER Don' RENEMBER ANY OF THE MOTION To REVIOME PROBATTON HENRIDG AND SEVIPENCEND DUE To HIS MENIAL OF BEING. SEE EXHIBIT MOTION To REVIOME PROBATTON HENRIDG AND SEVIPENCEND, REPORTER ^[5] RECORD, P65.6, 11-11, 21-22, 25-30,33,1 AND EXHIBIT M. H., THE PETITIONER ILLNESS CONSTST OF BIOGILAR DISORDER, MAJOR DEPAS. 3510 H , SCHITOL DEFFECTIVE, AND MENIAL DESORDERS. THE PETITIONER WAS HARMED WHEN THE PROSECUTOR, THE APPOINTED LANCEL AND THE VITUSI 252 DISTRITI COURT, SEEFFEREN CONITY, TEXHS, LWYNE WALKER, JUDGE PRESIDENE FACLED To DISCLASE THE NEEY SONYEL CONSEQUENILY, THE PETITION ER CONVIITION SHOULD BE REVERSED AND SET WISDE FOR ACQUSTUAL. THE CONVITION OF A LITERALLY INCOMPETENT THE PETITIONER VIOUSIES DUE PROCESS, U.S.C.A. CONST. AMEND. 14. THE PETITIONER MAY ON APPEND REV. IEN OF HIS SUBT E CONVITION ORTAIN RELIGT IT THE PETITIONER CAN SIGN THAT THE SUBT PROCEDURE WERE IN ADEQUAIS TO ENSURE

14.

That the Petitioner was competent to stand a treat for example if the treat could regard to conduct a competence. Heartho. See, Carier vs Johnson, 1318.30452,458, N. 10 ( $5^{\text{TH}}$ ctr. 1997) (extrude Pate vs Ropins on, 383 U.S.375,86 S. 47,836,15 L. 20, 20. 815, 1. The ${252}^{\text{nd}}$ bristere count, S. Fesson county, Texas, What Luy He waller, Sudee Prescribing DID NOT ACT WITHIN The buE Process Boundaries in the Petitioner Competency Because the visit could was detHb Dose To Hold a Incompetney HENRING. See, Johnson vs Sanyer 120 8.30. 1307, 1333, (5TH ctr. 1997), Apprailed counSEL, In the cause of performing his official bity as the Petitioner could apprailed ationery DID not EXCERECTSE THE USE OF His Skills DIDENTly as the Petitioner' ATIOMnEy. ATIOMnEy Burdank, AND The SefEesson county, Texas Presceritor Cress will beuse on February 13,2012 when they K NEN That the Petitioner was competent to stand treat on Take a Red Realntr. Apprailed Ationery and the Presceritor we met a K Nown Eperal Pg Yent riterst now a Known Expert Psychologist and Do not Reses the ExperItise To Say if the Petitioner was competent on not detHb That the coust the Presceritor now the Petitioner ationery that the Petitioner Evdulated by a Lrensed Psychicterst at the SefEesson county, Texas Jack Before The Petitioner Red Guilty To Srid effense in the Indictment, which was Required by LAM.

135 ves Preserited

There are seven Arbuade Pothits of Eeror, Fundamentals of dTherm. ise, upon which the Petitioner can deTarn RELtEF from The Convection of the ${252}^{\text{nd}}$ bristere count, SefEesson county, Texas What LuyHe WALKER, Sudee Prescribing.

334.

This is an appeal from a conviction in case no. 10 -10318, 10-10320, 10-10382, for alibranized Ixtmappufe, alobranized RoBRey, Burclary of Hacriltom, and from appeal no. 29 -13-00451 - CA, 09-13-00428-CA, 09-13-00469-CA, on Tebrurgy 13, 2012 The Petitioner caused Petitionment was Defferent and defferency by Subtced because He Knew That The Petitioner was Mental in Completion to make a field of burtly to the Sath offense's in the Sndriment for a term of Ten (10) years wab Subtested Problem. See, Exhort Notion to Revoks Problem Hebrands and Sententious, Reported ^[15] Record, P63. 6, 11-11, 21-22,25-30, 33) and Extroor ^[15] M H, and the Petitioner Had a Swornow Affubart I Staftow Hss Innocent, and the Counsel Dto not present the Evidence To The court on the behalf of the Petitioner which was a yelation of the Petitioner $b^{TM}$ Amendment, and Hss ${14}^{\text{TH}}$ Amendment. See, Exhort ^[15] once and two. Also see, Mencice vs state, (App. 9 oct. 2005 ) 115 Sw. 30.500, defferent Petitionment. See, Strackland vs wasHusion, 426 v. 5 . 668,104 S.C. $29.52,30$ L. $ED\mathrm{.20}{\mathrm{.6}}^{T4}$ (1884)

Counsell Here in was appointed to Represent The Petitioner on AppEAl.

The Reported counsel would have seen in the Reported ^[15] Record That The Petitioner was incompetent to have a notion to Revoks Problem Hebrands and Sententious, Reported ^[15] Record, P63. 6, 11-11, 21-22, 25-30,33, and Extroor ^[15] M H. The appointed counsel would have seen in the First Transcript That The Petitioner was virtually charge for three carme ^[15] that He Dtd. ^[15] Have Anythank to do with. See, Extroor ^[15] one and two, the Petitioner was

(TeX. Cerm. App. 2002) with Compiled Clam of Actual Innocence with Mr. PEDANET with Constitution of Sermative Evidence of The Petitioner" inm. oterace, Suan Dhal no Ratiquan Iyey woyub convict the Petitioner in Lehnf of The EvideNce. The Irual Court Error in Coversh The Petitioner a Problem under the Provisions of Unitinal Criminal Stitute, (veanow" Ann. P.C. 191.63) see, me earlier vs state, (ca. App. 1915) 521 Ssu 292, And aso me. Danow ards also stated in a petitioner that the Petitioner that nothing to do with His action on an adou Systenber 1, 2010. See Extret" onet Two, and Extret" A, inRough F, The Petitioner" who mental incompeten to stand a motion to Revise Re. blation Heman6 and Systencin6. At that time, and Extret" M H and Extret" M Eron To Revise Re blation Heman6 and Sestencin6, Reporten" Record, Pbs. 6, 11-11, 21-24, 25-30,33, will speak For The Record, and There are seven adouat the Points of Error as Fuclber deTated in this Brief

Mr. Cumend and Authoritics

The Evibence is Sufficient For The Petitioner To be Mequittal In The Move Cause no. 10-10318, 10-10320, 10-10382, And From Appen Ho' 09-00401-CA, 09-13-00468-CA, 09-13-00469-CA, Appenied Counsel Initiotio. vally and Knewinsly let the Petitioner Pled Guity to The Move Cause" When The Petitioner was mental incompeten to make a Plea tardation. This appointed counsel Initiationally Knew that the Petitioner that a defida. vIt Staitin6 that He was insecent of all change" And In the Indiscept. ment But, The Counsel DEd not PecSent The PEtitioner never Receved a Pyctholo bical Evaluation Pecs To his Pled of Cruelty to Ths Charect. The Petitioner Gounsel Should Have made And Cown Aware The Petitioner was merital incompeten and no court Procecting Swoub thave been Coanied without an Byentate Evaluation BeInk RecSented To And Cown. The Petitioner was already under doctor care through

The V.A. Hospital, and In The Jefferson County, Texas Jail, Takino Presert BeD Medications and under the Influence of Dovds and Alcohol up on His Arrest. When The Petitioner Was Arrested He was Never Examined By a Doctor. Counsel Should Have Made Total Subse Amuse of His Client State. His Fact About Is Leavds For A Evidentiany Hematid. This Is a Volation of His DUE Process under The U.S. Constitution ${14}^{\text{TH}}$ Amendment as 508 , yetionn MetAl HealH and MetHal Refaration 574.061 (D) 574.031, A Person Suspected of Mental HealH and Mental Illness are not To be Deferred of Inter Aty on B樣ers of The court opinion, A Lone Such An option, Is not I Self, EHough To Deprove Person of His Liberty, and Where There Is Sufficient Do U8T About Petitioner's Competency, Total Subse Must, Conduct Healink To DeT Example whether The Petitioner is capable of ProceidinG.SSE, Drope, 420 U.S. N1 335, 86 S.C. N1 842. A Juke's Fatiure to Perform His Dily Volates The Petitioner's DUE Process AUGHT To A Partitial or To A Part Pled Braketinn ALSO 508,420 U.S. N1 112, 95 S.C. N1 904, AND PAte, 393 U.S. N1 385 86 S.C. N1 842, CARTITIN vs LAKHART, 935 F. 20.926,930, ( 8 TH CIR.1991) AND 508, THE Supreme Court opinion In Speedy vs WYRick, 192 F. 20.123, ( 8TH CIR. 1883) AND 508, U.S. vs DANTS b1 F. 30.291,304, (5TH CIR. 1995) The Supreme Court His BARDED THAT The Court cannot deny Mental People A Mental Competency Healink. See, ReEd, 14 S.W. 30.438 (Tex. APH Houston, 14TH DIST. 2000) Also 508, EXPARE TUTILE, 45 S.W. 20.184, 188, (Tex. CArth. App. 819) AND Dusky vs UNTICD States, 362 U.S. 402 4 L.D. 20.924, 86 S.C. 188, (44b) Also, under The U.S. 14TH Amendment And The Total Court EAREd In Not Scurtin A order To A EYE HEAVREC OF PETITIONER THERE UNDER. The Petitioner relues that His Conviction Should Be Set aside Because of The court's ExponEds Dental of His U.S. 14TH Amendment To The DUE Process. The 252nd DeSited Loral Fatiure To Hold a Competency HealIn Deried the Petitioner DUE Process, and The Fatiure of Either of The Petitioner N'TURNEY To Request a Competency Healink ConstitutioNED InEffective NSISTANCE OF COUNSEL UNDER THE SIX AMENDMENT AND INFÉffective NSISTANCE OF COUNSEL

Under Article 1410 of The Texas Constitution and The Petitioner Contends The Court ErRed in Fostend is Landucl a competency Hearrind Pursuant toley code. Eram Proc. Ann. 287, 4L. 022 (8), and The Petitioner TLD counsel He Had a mervial Illness. See, column vi State, 959 S.W. 20 621, 625, Tex. Eram. App. 1897) The Petitioner Arrows The Trall court committed Reversible Error in Fostend to Landucl Either a Parliamentary Inquiry or a Trall on Petitioner Competency. The Decisions are in line with a decision by the Supreme Court But In 6 where the Justice in a 5-4 voig, Seld a Petitioner Had deficten the but. Help Eendy Bremse appeal lawyer Dron' Rase elall-ennes Thal Thee Trall lawyer were ineffective. The Petitioner Confined appeal and Trall Erled to unsover Evidee the deftcrenl Performance Pre Subtest The beforee to su ct a DEBREes Thal Petitioner was deproved of a Fair Trall. See, STralland. 15 WASHINGTON, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.C. 2952, 86 L.ED. 20614 , (1894) HERMANDEL vs STrle, 126 S.W. 2053,51 , (Tex. Eram. App. 1886). The Petitioner Has Allied Excise that. If Thee, might Eytitle The Petitioner To Acquirtal. See, STralland. 15 WASHINGTON, 466 U.S. 668 , (1884) And EYPARE PAtTerson, 993 S.W. 20, 114, 115, fley Cerm. App. 1884), and as Held in Eypaie Robert Gove 1334 S.W. 20, 294, (Tex. Eram. App. 1900). The Trall court is the Appraprable forum for FINDING of Frel. A miscarRable of Justice Has occurred when the 252nd octrel court Erled to Gove the Petitioner a competency hearrind that is Required under STrle and Federal Laws. These Fars, the Judgment of Convictions Should be Reversed for a EvIDENIARY Hearrind and the cause Remanded to the 252nd octrel Court To Enlry of a Judgment of Acquirtal. A appointed counsel must have a firm command of the Facts of the case as well as GoveRn in 6 laws before He or the can Reheder Reasonably effective assistance to his client in or out of the court Room. See, ExPatery DrEy, 801 S.W. 20, 501, 516, (Tex. Er.AP 1880), Elores vs STrle, 516 S.W. 20, 622, 634, Tex. Er. App. 1818), ExPate Evrind 516 S.W. 20, 941,947, (Tex. Er. App. 1818) Also see, Hearrind vs ESTrle, 491 F. 20 125, 128, (c. 15 1914), CARAWAY vs BETo, 421 F. 20 636, 637, (c. 1910)

19.

WILLIAMS VS GELLO, 354 F. 2D. 688, 105, (CAS M65). AND POWELL VS ALGAMA, 281 U.S. 45,53 S.C. 55,11 L. ED 158 (M32). THE SUPPERME COURT REGIONS'T THAT A TH. AROUGH INVESTIGATION IS THE FONDRATION upon WHICH EFFECTIVE ASSESTANCE OF COUNSEL IS BULLT. AN RITORNEY HAS THE PROFECTIONAL DUTY To PRESENT ALL ANAI. L. NOLZ EVIDENCE AND ARBUMONIS IN A CERMYNAL RESOLUTION To SUPPER DEFE. NSE OF HIS CLICHT, SEC, EXPARIC DUT'F (CR. App. 1880) 801 S.W. 2D. 501 , AND MC WETEC vs SIRIC (App. 9 DESI. 2005) 115 S.W. 3D. 500 , EXPARTE C. REYTION ETH S.W. 2015 , (TEX. CERN. NPP. 1984) WEST CERAMTED, WHERE EVIDENCE C HOWED THAT CONSEL MIS REPRESENTED THE TERMS OF THE PLER BARGANN, SEC, MEMORY VS RHAY 389 U.S. 128, 134, 88 S.C. 254 , (1961). DUTUGA vs SIRIC, 116 S.W. 2D. 48 (TEX. CERN, NPP. 1886). THE PESTIONER CLREN OF THE E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E

ON feSBuary 13, 2012 came to be heard in the No. case 103-18, 10380, 10382, before the unj, 252 "bssiterci couri Heub for a motion to Bevobke Probatron PLED of TBuC and SENIENCTHb. The 252 "bssiterci couar ERRoR By vrobat rHb the Petitioner H"AMEmbment of the United States consitititron Because He was aticndivb A mOtion To Bevoke Probatron PLEA of TBuE and SenienctHb Before the Petitioner Received The 10 year Probatron. See, ExHeDtI mOtion To BevokE Probatron PLEA of TBuE and SENIENCTHb Before the Petitioner PEs. 11-23, the 252 "bssiterci couar ERRoR By vrobatrn6 The Texas Penal code ART. 12.14 First b

Petit. See, exhorti M.H. and Exhorti Matzon To Revoke Probatron Heartfind and Sentimento, Reported Record, Pbs. 1, 11-11, 21-22, 25-30,33,1. And Also, Apporited Cancel HmEN That The Petitioner Just wnst to feel out of The Canily Just After Death There for 18 months for a erime or crime the DIDn' count, And also the Petitioner Also HAD A Comment to ettubant for many months while Death In The Canily Jast, And The Petitioner Apporited Cancel TOW ADVANIARSE of HEM Which was a violation of the Petitioner 10th And 14th American of the United States Genstition The 25 th District Court Report when Leyne Walker, Judie Westobend Dian' Honer the Petitioner Kittubant Stafting That He Dian' Have Nolhumb To Do with the crime's That Mr. DANON ARDS committed on September 1,2010 And Mr DANON ARDS Told a Dib ice on the Petitioner After Estimate a Snorming Kittubant That He Dian' Have my Thumb To Do with His crime's To The D.A. office in order To Receive a Better Plan Dardation Become He was Evictly as charge. Cancel for The Petitioner Dian' Protect The Petitioner 15th And 14th American of the United States Genstition Decrease He Dib not orise To The matter of Hand or File Any Motions To move the visual 252 th District Court To Erismiss All charge's Absent The Petitioner Become He was a Honocent Person In The matter. See, ready vs cRAAWr, 1164 1.2D. 1113, (ABS), And Extinct one And Tho, And Motion To Revoke Probatron Plan of True and Sentencring Pbs. 18). James Healy Appens from His Convection and Life Sentence for The MUMBER of Les Days, Healy contends That His TRENl Affomely EnEled To Secure The Testimony of Three Persons whose Testimony MIGHT HME ESTABLISHED AN ALERT FOR HEM, There By Depreciable HEM of The EFFECTIVE RESENTANCES OF CONSEL, EVALANIERED By THE SEALD AMENDMENT To The UNTED STATES CONSTITtion Decrease The TRENl DOTLED DANN'T o A Swerable MAlch Petition A ProSention without The crime, And Healy, who DOTLED ANY PART IN 17, And BECAUSE THE

23.

MISRAND IESTIMONY MIGHT HING AFFECLD THE JUNY'S APPARISAL OF THE TRUNGCHNESS OF THE SIARE' VICH WEST AND IS EVALUATION OF THE RELATIVE CREDIDELITY OF THE CONFLICTING WITNESSS, WEALEY HAS STALED A CLANON OF IN EFFECTIVE RESISTANCE OF CONNALL. WE THERSEFERE, REVERSE THE DESTION OF THE DISTRICT COURT DERYTHO WELLY'S PETEIYON FOR WAST OF HADERS COR- PLS AND REMANAD FOR, FOR EVERY OF AN ORDER CRANITAL HEM A NEN TRUNG A SUBSTANIERL BODY OF FITTH CERSITI CHEE LAM INSTSIS, HOM EVER, THE EFF- ECTIVE CONNALL CONDUCT A REMEDIABLE AMONIT OF PREFRAL INVESTIGATION ALTHOUGH THE Scape OF THE REPLICAD INVESTIGATION IS A function of THE NUMBER of ISSUES IN THE LIME, THE RELATIVE CONSUEVETY OF THESE ISSUES, THE STRENISH OF THE COHVERNMENT'S CREE AND THE OVERALL STRAIELY OF TRIAL CONNAELL, THESE EXECUTY HAS RECOGNITED THAT, AT A MINIMUM, COURSEL HAS THIS Dily TO INTERVIEW PREFRICAL WITNESS AND IS MAKE AN IN DEPENDENT INVESTIGATION OF THE FACES AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CREE. THIS Dily IS RE- FLECTED IN THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION STANDARDS FOR CIRCUSING JUSTICE. AT A MINIMUM, COURSEL HAS Dily TO INTERVIEW PREFRICAL WITNESS ES AND IS MAKE AN INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION OF THE FACES, AND CIRCUMST- ANCES OF THE CREE. U.S.C.A. CONST. AMEND, b, AND PREFICONER'S CONNALL' EATL- VAS IS CONTACT PREFRICAL ALERT WITNESS AND LOARIE WITNESSS WHO CO- UB HANE CORRODARALISD PETRICONER IESTIMONY WAS NOT PASESSIONALLY REA- SORVABLE. U.S.C.A. CONST. AMEND, b. PETRICONER ADEQUATHEX ESTABLISHED THAT HE WAS PRESUADED BY THE CONNALL'S FUTURE TO SCEUAE IESTIMONY. THE Scape OF OUR REVIEW IS COVERNED BY STREAKLAND US WASHINGTON, SERCKLAND, THE SUPPARME COURT WELLD THAT ALTHOUGH DISTRICT COURT TANDING HE SURVECT TO THE CLERALY PERONEOUS STANDARD OF TED. ALLEN. CIV. PROC. 52 (A) THE IN EFFECTIVE WES IN JUNY (INVOYE) MEEN QUESTION OF LAM AND FACES. THIS IS CONSISTED WITH A LAM CLINC OF FITTH CERSITI C ADES HOLDING THAT WHEITER A DEPENDENT HAS RECEIVED EFFECTIVE RESISTANCE OF CONNALL IS A MYYED QUESTION OF FACES AND LAM RATH-

23.

EA THAN RUELY A Quisition of FACt. The LovaI MIST, THEREFORE, MAKS AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION DIEED ON THEES SUBSTDFAARY FUNDERS IN DESTEMPLYING WHEI HER CANSEL'S REPRESENTATION DATISTED THE STANDARD DISTATED GY THE SMITH AND FACTECHTH AMENDMENTS, WE ARE RESPONSE To MAKS OR ONY DESTEMPYNATION WHEIHER DURDINE'S REPRESENTATION PRESS CONSTITUYONAL MUSIER, AND DO NOT DEEER To THE DESTECT COURT CONELUSION. IN STRECKLAND THE THE SUPPERME CAURT EHUMETATED THE THO COMPONENI'S TANDARD To BE ABQLED WHEN REVERSIDD A CLATM OF IN EFFECTIVE PERSIANCE OF COURSEL. THE COURT HELD FAUST THE DESTENDANT MIST SHOW THAT COUNSEL PERFORMANCE WAS DEELECT EHT THES RESURRING SHOWNING THAT COUNSEL WAS NOT FUNCTIONING AS THE COURT EQUERANIZED THAT THE DESTENDANT BY THE SMITH AMEND MENTISECOND, THE DESTENDANT MIST SHOW THAT THE DESTECTED PERFORMANCE PROFORMANCE RESIDUCED THE DESTEME THES RESURCES SHOWNING THAT COUNSEL'S EARIMS WERE So SERIOUS AS To DEPRISE THE PERTICTED OF A FAIR THAT A TRIAL W HASE RESULT IS RELIABLE UNLESS A PERTICTED MAKES DOTH SHOWNING, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE CONVICTION OR DEATH SENTENCE RESUTED FROM A DREAKDOWN IN THE ADVERSAAY. PRESS THAT DENDERS THE RESULT UNRELIABLE THE COURT STABSSED THAT THE PUBLISH OF THE CONSTITUYONAL REQUERCMENT OF EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE IS TO ENSURE A FAIR TRIAL, AND THAT THE DESEHMARE FOR SUBSTAND MIV CLATM OF IN EFFECTIVE EHES MIST BE WHEIHER CONSSEL'S CONDUCT BE UNDEPRENCED THE PROPERT UNCTRONING OF THE ADVERSAATAL PROCESS THAT THE TRIAL CANNOT BE RELIVED ON AS HAVING PRODUCED A FAIR RESULT. 556,101 F.3D. 1064, REVERSED, AND CERTIFERAR'S WHEI EARISED. ALSO 556, STRECKLAND US WASHINGTON, 466 U.S. 618, 1045. Cf. 2052, 2064, 30 L.ED 20, 674, (1984), THE EYEHTH AMENDMENTS AND HIDDY A COURT LIPUEL AND UNUSUAL PHENSHMENT AND THE FOURTEETH AMENDMENT'S DUE PRESS EQUANRANIER THEREFORE FOR DID HIS UNISE CONVICIYON. HE SUPPLIED THE CLATM WITH PERTIDAVYT TENDING TO SHOW THAT THE PERTICTED HADN'T COMMITED THESE'S ERENES

24.

The Petitioner Stated His Actual Innoelence Clasm and The SupportIthD of ftdant in the 252 nd Distart cannt, Jefferson County, Texas LA yne wauker, unjust Iuble fere9ubine. See, Herdera vs tollins, cte as 112 S. et. 859 , (1993). See, EynEer ^[15] one and Twd. if The Canter earIntral appens Desdores with apporited counsel ^[15] there in, then this appent should be requiredin the interest of Justice.

Respectfully SuDmited,

WELLE EulENE HARDEMAN TDES-10 1891985 Jester III UNIT 3 Jester Road Richmond, Texas 7740 b

25 ,

No. 15 10-10318, 10-10389, 10-10382,

From AppEAL No. 9 09-13-00461-CA CA-13-00468-CA CA-13-00469-CA

WILlte EvloEne HARDEMAN Petitianer $\times$ V5 $◻$

In The Court of Criminal $\times$ AppEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HeREBy CERTIFy THAT ON SCHRUARY 12, 2015, A T'AVE AND CORRECT COPY OF PETITIANER ^[15] PARTY WAS MAILEDD TO THE ATTORNEY ^[15] FOR THE SAIE By U.S. First Class MAIL ADDRESSED TO:

RODHEY D. CONERLY ASSTSTANI DISTARCI ATTORNEY SEFFERSON COURTY COURTINOUS 1001 PERAL STACET, $3^{\text{th}}$ FLOOR BRANONOAT, TEXAS TITIO!

Lylillic HARDEMAN

Petitianer - 980 se I, WILlTE EvGENE HARDEMAN, TDES*1891985, BEZHED PRESENTLY

22.

In exercerated In The Jester ill unit of The Texas Department of CArMENAL Justice - InSTITUTIONAL DIVISION IN RECHMOND, EXCELTERITY AND DECLARO UNDER PENALty of PENJURY THAT THE FORD CODING PETITONER BREET IS TAUO AND CORRECT. EXECUTED ON THIS THE 12 DAYS OF FESRUARY 2015

Wihie E. NARDEMAN
PETITONER - PRO 56
TDES-ID ${}^{4}1891995$

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLAME WITH RULE 9.4

I WERE BY CERTIFY THAT THIS BREET CONPLUS WITH THE REQUEREMENT OF TEX. R. APP. PROP. 9.4 (I) (2) (8) BECAUSE THERE ARE MANY WORDS IN THIS BREET.

LONELUSIDN AND PRAYER

WHERSTORF, PREMISGS CONSTRERED, PETITONER PRAY THAT THIS COURT CERNT THIS PETITONER? BREET, AND FOR SULH OTHER AND SURTHER RELLET AS THE COURT MAY DEEM APPROPRIRIS.

RESPECTFULLY 5 US METTED,

WILLIE EUGENE HARDEMAN TDES-1D ${}^{4}1891995$ JESTER III UNIT 3 JESTER ROAD RECHMOND, TEXAS 74406

ExHrerer's

In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

NO. 09-13-00467-CR NO. 09-13-00468-CR NO. 09-13-00469-CR

WILLIE EUGENE.HARDEMAN, Appellant V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause Nos. 10-10378, 10-10380, 10-10382

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In three separate plea bargain agreements, Willie Eugene Hardeman, a habitual offender, pleaded guilty to aggravated kidnapping, aggravated robbery, and burglary of a habitation in causes numbers 10-10378, 10-10380, and 10-10382, respectively. In each case, the trial court found the evidence sufficient to

substantiate Hardeman's guilt, deferred further proceedings, placed Hardeman on community supervision for ten years, and assessed a $\$100$ fine. Thereafter, the State filed an Amended Motion to Revoke Unadjudicated Probation. Hardeman pleaded true to violations of the conditions of his community supervision. Finding four of the alleged violations true in each case, the trial court granted the motions to revoke and sentenced Hardeman in each case to seventy-five years in prison, to be served concurrently.

Hardeman's appellate counsel filed briefs that present counsel's professional evaluation of the records and conclude the appeals are frivolous. See Anders $v$ . California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). On April 25, 2014, we granted an extension of time for Hardeman to file a pro se brief in each case. Hardeman filed a pro se brief in response. The Court of Criminal Appeals has held that we need not address the merits of issues raised in Anders briefs or pro se responses. Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Rather, an appellate court may determine that: (1) "the appeal is wholly frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds no reversible error"; or (2) "arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues." Id.

We reviewed the appellate records, and we agree with counsel's conclusion that no arguable issues support the appeals. Therefore, we find it unnecessary to order appointment of new counsel to re-brief the appeals. Compare Stafford $v$ . State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). We affirm the trial court's judgments of conviction. ^[2]

AFFIRMED.

LEANNE JOHNSON
Justice

Submitted on November 5, 2014 Opinion Delivered November 19, 2014 Do Not Publish Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Johnson, JJ.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF Jefferson County

AFFIDAVII

UNSWORN DECLARATION

I. Daman Aale ..... JCSOID# 297732 [PRINT NAME] BEING PRESENTLYINCARCERATED IN THE JEFFERSON COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS, DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE FOREGOING IS TRUE AND CORRECT?

EXECUTED THIS DATE: $4124[20]$

Tirion Aida SIGNATURE: CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE,TITLE 6,CHAPTER132, VTCA:

A WRITTEN UNSWORN DECLARATION MADE AS PROVIDED BY THIS CHAPTER BY AN INMATE IN A COUNTY JAIL MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF AN OATH REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC.

| 01:21PM | 2 | | :--: | :--: | | 01:22PM | 3 | | 01:22PM | 4 | | 01:22PM | 5 | | 01:22PM | 6 | | 01:22PM | 7 | | 01:22PM | 8 | | 01:22PM | 9 | | 01:22PM | 10 | | 01:22PM | 11 | | 01:22PM | 12 | | 01:22PM | 13 | | 01:23PM | 14 | | 01:23PM | 15 | | 01:23PM | 16 | | 01:23PM | 17 | | 01:23PM | 18 | | 01:23PM | 19 | | 01:23PM | 20 | | 01:23PM | 21 | | 01:23PM | 22 | | 01:23PM | 23 | | 01:23PM | 24 | | 01:23PM | 25 |

P R O C E E D I N G S THE COURT: Willie Hardeman. You doing okay today, sir? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Okay. You are Mr. Hardeman. Let's go through this real quick. You have been indicted for three different cases, okay?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. THE COURT: An aggravated kidnapping, alleged -- an aggravated robbery alleged, and a burglary of a habitation alleged. First one we'll talk about is the aggravated kidnapping, okay? And again, I don't know anything about these cases, so I am not judging you. I am not saying anything. If you want a trial, we are going to give you a trial. I want to make sure you fully understand all of your rights before we get to that point.

Now, under our law aggravated kidnapping as indicted is a first degree felony, okay? What's the range of punishment for a first degree felony?

THE DEFENDANT: 5 to 99. THE COURT: 5 to 99 or? THE DEFENDANT: Or life. THE COURT: Or life, and if a fine is assessed is cannot exceed how much? $10,000, okay. Now,

| 01:23PM | 1 | it's also alleged in this indictment -- if a jury finds | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | 01:23PM | 2 | you not guilty of this, we just go to your next case, all | | 01:23PM | 3 | right? If they find you guilty, that's when you got to | | 01:23PM | 4 | start taking a look at what's appropriate punishment. | | 01:23PM | 5 | Now, from the jury -- well, how many prior felony | | 01:23PM | 6 | convictions do you have, sir? | | 01:23PM | 7 | THE DEFENDANT: About five. | | 01:24PM | 8 | THE COURT: I'm glancing through this but | | 01:24PM | 9 | two of these are real, three of these are real, four of | | 01:24PM | 10 | these are real -- long story short, if the jury believes | | 01:24PM | 11 | that two of your prior second degree sequenced felonies | | 01:24PM | 12 | are true, then that's going to increase your punishment | | 01:24PM | 13 | range to what? | | 01:24PM | 14 | THE DEFENDANT: 25 to life. | | 01:24PM | 15 | THE COURT: Minimum 25, just upon a jury | | 01:24PM | 16 | finding you guilty, minimum 25 years up to how much? | | 01:24PM | 17 | THE DEFENDANT: Life. | | 01:24PM | 18 | THE COURT: Life, all right? So do you | | 01:24PM | 19 | understand the punishment range in that case? | | 01:24PM | 20 | And 10380 they indicted you for aggravated | | 01:24PM | 21 | robbery, okay? Under our law aggravated robbery is a | | 01:24PM | 22 | what? What's the degree felony? | | 01:24PM | 23 | THE DEFENDANT: 5 to 99. | | 01:24PM | 24 | THE COURT: Okay. It's a first degree | | 01:24PM | 25 | felony as alleged. If they believe that one of your -- |

LEAH HAYES CSR. TCRR

CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT (409) 835-8579

or that two of your prior and sequenced felony convictions are true then that's a habitual as well. So what's the range of punishment for habitual offender?

THE DEFENDANT: $\underset{―}{5}$ to 99 to life. THE COURT: No, 25 minimum up to life. So that's two. That's two potential minimum 25 up to life, and then 10382 is a burglary of a habitation, okay? What degree felony is burglary of a habitation?

THE DEFENDANT: 2 to 20. THE COURT: 2 to 20 on the burglary of a habitation. Now, if a jury believes that your prior history reveals that you have got two second degree felony convictions and they are sequenced, then what's your range of punishment?

THE DEFENDANT: $\underset{―}{25}$ to life. THE COURT: Is that what it is? MR. THOMAS: Uh-huh. THE COURT: You-all comfortable over there? MR. BURBANK: Second degree. MR. THOMAS: Second degree with habitual. THE COURT: I agree with that. I'm just asking you if you are comfortable with that. MR. BURBANK: Unless they have changed it. THE COURT: You got three cases that you can be habitual on each one. So the worst thing that can

| 01:26PM | 1 | happen to you is what? | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | 01:26PM | 2 | THE DEFENDANT: Can happen? | | 01:26PM | 3 | THE COURT: What's the worst thing that can | | 01:26PM | 4 | happen to you? | | 01:26PM | 5 | THE DEFENDANT: I guess I can get life, | | 01:26PM | 6 | but... | | 01:26PM | 7 | THE COURT: You can get three life's. | | 01:26PM | 8 | THE DEFENDANT: Yeah, but, you know, I | | 01:26PM | 9 | mean, you know, they talking about you. They say you are | | 01:26PM | 10 | a hard man, but in a way you kind of fair, and he have an | | 01:26PM | 11 | affidavit that man signed and then he told a lie to him. | | 01:26PM | 12 | I didn't do nothing. You can ask the other guy that was | | 01:26PM | 13 | at the house. I didn't. | | 01:26PM | 14 | THE COURT: Do you have an affidavit that | | 01:26PM | 15 | says he didn't do anything? | | 01:26PM | 16 | MR. BURBANK: Yes. | | 01:26PM | 17 | THE COURT: Did you read the affidavit? | | 01:26PM | 18 | MR. THOMAS: I did not. I have an | | 01:26PM | 19 | affidavit from the co-defendant that inculpates. | | 01:26PM | 20 | MR. BURBANK: I think I sent -- | | 01:26PM | 21 | THE DEFENDANT: So somebody is perjuring. | | 01:26PM | 22 | THE COURT: No, I understand. And to | | 01:27PM | 23 | answer your question, I am hard on people that I need to | | 01:27PM | 24 | be hard on. I believe in holding people accountable for | | 01:27PM | 25 | their criminal conduct. |

LEAH HAYES CSR, TCRR CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT (409) 835-8579

| 01:27PM | 1 | for the jury. I am not passing on the -- | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | 01:27PM | 2 | THE DEFENDANT: I know he lied because he | | 01:27PM | 3 | told them that I had a mental thing I was crazy, and that | | 01:28PM | 4 | lawyer I had took like a month, made me see a | | 01:28PM | 5 | psychiatrist and the psychiatrist said I wasn't crazy | | 01:28PM | 6 | even though I had a stroke. Sometimes I can't remember | | 01:28PM | 7 | and sometimes I have trouble speaking, but I didn't do | | 01:28PM | 8 | it. | | 01:28PM | 9 | THE COURT: I understand that. | | 01:28PM | 10 | THE DEFENDANT: And they told me we was | | 01:28PM | 11 | going on some dope, and when we got out there he pulled a | | 01:28PM | 12 | pistol out on that dude. And I said, Why are you doing | | 01:28PM | 13 | that man like that? What's wrong with you? And he told | | 01:28PM | 14 | me to shut up and he start kicking in the door, and once | | 01:28PM | 15 | he kicked in the door he told me to come in. I really | | 01:28PM | 16 | wanted to run, but I couldn't run because the other dude | | 01:28PM | 17 | in the car. They had tried to do my girlfriend and her | | 01:28PM | 18 | kids' harm and he told me all I had to do was score some | | 01:29PM | 19 | dope for them. I didn't know nothing about it. Well -- | | 01:29PM | 20 | I don't know. One gun from here and the other dude he | | 01:29PM | 21 | had already got a gun. So, you know, I ain't -- the only | | 01:29PM | 22 | reason I took the gun so them little kids wouldn't get | | 01:29PM | 23 | hurt, and then that dude in the car -- I jumped out the | | 01:29PM | 24 | window. You know, I guess I fell out the window. I | | 01:29PM | 25 | didn't jump out. I fell out because I'm paralyzed on one |

LEAH HAYES CSR, TCRR CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT (409) 835-8579

| 01:29PM | 1 | side, and I was going to go and kill that dude in the car | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | 01:29PM | 2 | because that's the one that threatened me, but then he | | 01:29PM | 3 | said if I said anything they were still going to do the | | 01:29PM | 4 | girl. So I ain't too much worried about them, but I want | | 01:30PM | 5 | to bring that dude back because I want him to perjure | | 01:30PM | 6 | himself in court because he lie on me. | | 01:30PM | 7 | THE COURT: Are you talking about the guy | | 01:30PM | 8 | that's already got 10 years? | | 01:30PM | 9 | Yes, sir. | | 01:30PM | 10 | THE COURT: He is here. All right. So you | | 01:30PM | 11 | want a trial in each one of your cases? | | 01:30PM | 12 | THE DEFENDANT: Yes, sir. | | 01:30PM | 13 | THE COURT: What is the offer, for the | | 01:30PM | 14 | record? | | 01:30PM | 15 | MR. BURBANK: The offer is 10 years, Your | | 01:30PM | 16 | Honor, in TDC. | | 01:30PM | 17 | THE COURT: 10 years what? | | 01:30PM | 18 | MR. BURBANK: 10 years TDC. | | 01:30PM | 19 | THE COURT: We'll put you back in there. | | 01:30PM | 20 | If you have any more questions let me know before we get | | 01:30PM | 21 | started, okay? | | 01:30PM | 22 | MR. BURBANK: Oh, for the record, does he | | 01:30PM | 23 | accept or reject that offer? | | 01:30PM | 24 | THE COURT: Do you accept or reject that | | 01:30PM | 25 | offer of 10 years? |

| 01:30PM | 1 | | :--: | :--: | | 01:30PM | 2 | | 01:30PM | 3 | | 01:30PM | 4 | | 01:30PM | 5 | | 01:30PM | 6 | | 01:30PM | 7 | | 01:30PM | 8 | | 01:30PM | 9 | | 02:06PM | 10 | | 02:06PM | 11 | | 02:06PM | 12 | | 02:06PM | 13 | | 02:06PM | 14 | | 02:06PM | 15 | | 02:06PM | 16 | | 02:06PM | 17 | | 02:06PM | 18 | | 02:06PM | 19 | | 02:06PM | 20 | | 02:06PM | 21 | | 02:06PM | 22 | | 02:06PM | 23 | | 02:06PM | 24 | | 02:06PM | 25 |

THE DEFENDANT: No, sir. I didn't do nothing.

THE COURT: You reject it? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. THE COURT: Okay. Good deal. MR. BURBANK: Okay. THE COURT: All right. I will visit with you-all. (Brief Recess) THE COURT: Mr. Burbank, are you ready? MR. BURBANK: Yes, sir. If I may put something on the record. THE COURT: Yes, sir. Go right ahead. MR. BURBANK: We are back on the record in reference to your cases, Mr. Hardeman; is that correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. MR. BURBANK: Okay. And since we have been in front of this Court the State made a new offer and that is to put you on probation for 10 years deferred probation; is that correct?

THE DEFENDANT: Yes. MR. BURBANK: And we have discussed this fully; is that correct? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. MR. BURBANK: You know today you have a

| 02:06PM | 1 | perfect right to have a jury trial in each one of those | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | 02:06PM | 2 | cases? | | 02:06PM | 3 | THE DEFENDANT: Yes. | | 02:06PM | 4 | MR. BURBANK: And today is trial day. Do | | 02:07PM | 5 | you understand that? | | 02:07PM | 6 | THE DEFENDANT: Uh-huh. | | 02:07PM | 7 | MR. BURBANK: You have decided that you | | 02:07PM | 8 | would like to take now the offer of the State; is that | | 02:07PM | 9 | correct? | | 02:07PM | 10 | THE DEFENDANT: Yes. | | 02:07PM | 11 | MR. BURBANK: And that is 10 years' | | 02:07PM | 12 | deferred probation on each cases | | 02:07PM | 13 | THE DEFENDANT: Yes. | | 02:07PM | 14 | MR. BURBANK: Now, you are making this | | 02:07PM | 15 | decision voluntarily? | | 02:07PM | 16 | THE DEFENDANT: Yes. | | 02:07PM | 17 | MR. BURBANK: No one made any threats or | | 02:07PM | 18 | promises to you, correct? | | 02:07PM | 19 | THE DEFENDANT: No, sir. | | 02:07PM | 20 | MR. BURBANK: And you fully understand | | 02:07PM | 21 | everything that you have said or you have signed in | | 02:07PM | 22 | reference to these plea papers, correct? | | 02:07PM | 23 | THE DEFENDANT: Yes. | | 02:07PM | 24 | MR. BURBANK: You have no more questions of | | 02:07PM | 25 | me. I fully answered all your questions, right? |

LEAH HAYES CSR, TCRR CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT (409) 835-8579

Progress Notes

1. Depression
2. Medical issues (HTN, HPLD, DM, Hep C, s/p CVA 2009)

Hisotry of Present Illness: Patient seen as walk-in at outpatient clinic yesterday. Pt left appointment to "smoke" but then never returned to clinic. Pt received phone call from probation officer that upset him, and according to patient, this phone call is why he did not report back to clinic. Rather he reported to the ED later that evening stating he may hurt himself if it becomes too much and he doesn't get some rest.

Patient has long h/o of polysubstance abuse and depression. States that for the past three years. he has been "feeling down" which he relates to residual symptoms from stroke.

Mental Health Assessment: Appearance:appropriate dress/hygiene Demeanor:pleasant, cooperative Speech: somewhat slurred (secondary to stroke) Mood:"Feels like everything is closing in, needs time away from others" Psychomotor agitation/retardation:denies, non-observed (mild right HP secondary to stroke) Affect: reactive Thought Process: hard to follow patient at times, unsure if tangential, or patient just has a hard time communicating and interpreting questions Thought Content: denies AVH, delusions, paranoia. Very focused on death of all the women in his life (mother, grandmother, wife, daughter, friend from rehab). As well as opinions/thoughts of probation officer. Insight/Judgement: good SI/HI: no SI/HI during interview Sleep: no complaints Appetite: no complaints Interests: none illicited Concentration: reports memory issues since stroke in 2009 Energy Level: no complaints Feelings of guilt/worthlessness/hopelessness: denies, but pt does "feel like everything is closing in" Pain: denies Social History: Family/friend support: female cousin Elaine (home 817-457-2899), on her way from california

Education: 8th grade, completed GED in 1989 Occupation: h/o maintenance work Current Stressors: relationship w/ probation officier "thinks he's playing games, not really having SI." Death of all women he was close to in his life, unresolved grief. Ethanol use: denies

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

General

Progress Notes

REgarding Mr. Hardeman's probation officer, Elaine only knows that the officer has been giving him problems, and that he would like to switch

officers. She does not know more details.

Elaine said that he is anxious about wanting to go back to school, as he "did some junior college" and may only have a few units left to graduate, though she is not sure. She says he wants to work afterwards.

As Mr. Hardeman's wife and daughter passed away, he has no one else really but her to count on for support. Their finances are stable.

Elaine says she never had any problems with Mr. Hardeman while at home, and is ready.to receive Mr. Hardeman at anytime he is ready to be discharged. /es/ JASON R PAI Signed: $07/24/201312:40$ Receipt Acknowledged By: 07/25/2013 16:44 /es/ CELESTE E VALENCIA 07/24/2013 14:05 /es/ NASIR ZAKI, MD STAFF PSYCHIATRIST

LOCAL TITLE: MH NURSE INPT ASSESSMENT/FLAN OY CARE STANDARD TITLE: MENTAL HEALTH NURSING ADMISSION EVALUATION NOTE DATE OF NOTE: JUL 24, 2013@12:07 ENTRY DATE: JUL 24, 2013@12:07:12 AUTHOR: LAMELA, LEONIDA O EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED

Inpt Nursing Assessment Assessment Time: Jul 24,2013@12:05 PSYCHOLOGICAL General Appearance: Poor hygiene, wears hospital pajamas Sleep patterns: rested upon awakening Affect: Ojective: appropriate Mood: Subjective: Patient's description: "Not so good" Eye contact: normal Speech: normal (coherent) Behavior: cooperative Thought process/content: thoughts organized, able to process information

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

Pt avoids/declines to give a urine sample after many cups of water and many requests. Sitter reports he used restroom but did not provide a sample." also interesting to note similar pattern of " Easily engageable, but becomes irritable when admission plans are not of his liking." ( at the time of discharge)

DX : malingering antisocial personality disorder polysubstance dependence Plan : discharge as he is being gamy, no plans of suicide, meds on board, was in prosthetic clinic indicating interest and desire for better future.. Discharge /es/ NEELIMA PRADHAN Signed: $07/30/201303:48$

LOCAL TITLE: MH TELEPHONE NOTE STANDARD TITLE: MENTAL HEALTH TELEPHONE ENCOUNTER NOTE DATE OF NOTE: JUL 27, 2013@11:09 ENTRY DATE: JUL 27, 2013@11:09:41 AUTHOR: LAMELA, LEONIDA O EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED Place a follow up call to this veteran and able to speak with his cousin Elaine who says that patient is doing fine and she talked with the Veteran before the RN call. Advised her to tell the Veteran to call the VA for any problem, phone # was given. /es/ LEONIDA O LAMELA RN Signed: $07/27/201311:13$

LOCAL TITLE: MH SUICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT STANDARD TITLE: SUICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT NOTE DATE OF NOTE: JUL 25, 2013@16:14 ENTRY DATE: JUL 25, 2013@16:15:02 AUTHOR: VALENCIA, CELESTE E EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED The supervising practitioner for this episode of care, Dr. Zaki, was present during the interview and examination of this patient and agrees with my assessment and plan. -------SUICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT-------

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

deficits s/o CVA. Speech wnl of r/t/v. Nonpressured. Nonlabile. Mood: depressed Affect: full, mood congruent. Sensorium and Cognition: alert and oriented x3. Thought Process: coherent, logical and goal directed. No FOI/LOA. Thought Content: vague SI. Formulates plan "to jump" after brief contemplation or to shoot himself although he does not have access to one and notes he is a convicted felon and that would definitely violate his probation. No violent ideation, intent or plan. No AH/VH/delusions. Concentration: Intact for conversation. Memory: recent intact. He has self reported difficulty with long term memory. Intelligence: average. J/I: fair. INITIAL DSM-IV DIAGNOSIS --Axis I-------- Depression NOS polysubstance dependence -- -Axis II Personality Disorders------ antisocial traits -- -Axis III Current Medical Conditions------ see cprs problem list -- -Axis IV Current Psychosocial Stressors------ Housing, financial, unemployed, primary support, physical limitations from CVA -- -Axis V GAF score (current level of functioning)------ 40 ------INITIAL IMPRESSION AND BIOPSYCHOSOCIAL FORMULATION------ Mr. Hardeman is a 56 y.o. AA male vet with a hx of depression, CVA with R hemiparesis and polysubstance dependence. Today reporting vague SI and reporting inconsistent information when compared with prior CPRS notes. No prior acute psych admission, unclear what precipitants brought him here tonight. Vet has limited social support, however he is skilled at utilizing community and VA resources. Vet is on probation until 2022 for robbery. He has served 19 yrs. in prison for theft and possession of narcotics.

Preliminary Problem list: depression r/o malingering Insomnia

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

urine sample that he was hesitating on admission. His bag was stolen yesterday, stating people take advantage of his physical disability. He lives with his cousin in Arlington, who is out of town till tomorrow. Stating, 'I need some time to get away from stress". He will tell us tomorrow if he is ready to go. Currently denies any SI, HI . Vet does not own a Firearm. He denied sx of psychoses or mania.

A/P: This is a 56 yo with h/o Polysubstance abuse vs dep and depression NOS who presents on his own to the ED reporting vague SI &; inconsistent information as to what brought him to the hospital. He has limited social support, however he is skilled at utilizing community and VA resources. Vet is on probation until 2022 for robbery. He has served 19 yrs. in prison for theft and possession of narcotics. 1.Safety: Currently denies SI, continue q 15 minutes routine safety checks. 2. Polsubstance dep: Pt denies using any more .Went through two Substance abuse treatment in Houston in 2009 and at this VA in Nov 2012. 3.Depression NOS: Continue Zoloft 200 mg q am, Trazodone 100 mg q pm. Rsik /benefits discussed. Will recommend his out tp team to offer counseling for unresolved grief. 4.Medicval issues: Hep C, DM,HTN, HLD, S/P CVA: Continue current out pt meds.Pt to be examined by the hospitalist for a physical. 5.Discharge planning: He lives with his cousin in Arlington. Received NSC VA pension $\$1022$ /month. He last worked in 2009 environmental cleanup. He is on probation for robbery until 2022. He checks in with his probation officer once month. Likely discharge in a day or two. Will appreciate SW assistance in discharge planning. /es/ NASIR ZAKI, MD STAFF PSYCHIATRIST Signed: 07/23/2013 11:39 Receipt Acknowledged By: $07/24/2013=09:39/$ es/ CHANCE W HENDRIX

LOCAL TITLE: MH EMERGENCY DEPT MEDICAL CLEARANCE NOTE

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

------HISTORY OF CURRENT ILLNESS------- 56 year old AAM, non-combat vet, homeless, with h/o depression, cognitive disorder, s/p CVA, polysubstance abuse who presents on his own to the ED reporting vague SI. He presented to 3 clinics prior to coming to the ED, but did not discuss SI with anyone. He walked in to Platinum team today, but did not wait to be seen. Notes indicate he left to smoke and did not return. He states his probation officer called while he was waiting and that conversation upset him causing him to leave clinic. Vet described unresolved grief, having his bag stolen yesterday, being taken advantage of by people due to his disability and loss of prior function as major stressors. He does not appear to have a plan for SI, but reported he would jump from a bride after brief contemplation. He denies HI or AVH. Poor sleep, energy and motivation. He was vague, talkative and very tangential most of the time. Did not offer appropriate information when discussing similar subject matter such as h/o extensive drug use with rehab when asked about current drug use. Denies substance abuse. Denies being homeless although his wheelchair and the attached belongings appear similar to other homeless veterans. Vet does not own a firearm. He denied sx of psychoses or mania.

Pt intially declined blood draw for medical clearance stating "I'm a Jehovah Witness and blood is the source of all life." He could not name the church he attended on Sunday. Did not mention "Kingdom Hall", but told provider he knows how to find it. Agreed to his blood specimen after Dr. Dietrich ra-explained need for medical clearance. Pt wanted to know specifically what would and would not be tested.

Pt avoids/declines to give a urine sample after many cups of water and many requests. Sitter reports he used restroom but did not provide a sample. -------PAST PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY------- Prior Outpatient: Substance abuse treatment in Houston in 2009 and at this VA in Nov 2012.

Psychotherapy: with Dr. Dodds for smoking cessation Hospitalizations: only for rehab Medication Trials: Sertraline and trazodone Contact with previous Mental Health Provider(s): currently seen by Platinum team - walked in today, but left prior to being seen; prior 5 N maintenance groups

Pulled forward from Aug 2012 history by RN Fitzgerald:

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUCENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

Physical limitations from CVA Bereavement Legal problems Self reported hx of Hepatitis C Preliminary Plan of Care:

1. Medical clearance prior to admission on 3 S
2. Admit to 3 s for safety and stabilization based on fact pt presented to Platinum Team clinic with an unknown need/complaint.
3. q15min safety checks.
4. will order all essential outpt meds that have been reordered by pt in the last 8 weeks.
5. Obtain UDS - pt has avoided/refused to give one in the ER. Suspect relapse and pt is likely concerned results may be reported to probation officer. /es/ KIMBERLY M DOBBINS, MD Staff Physician Signed: 07/23/2013 02:44

LOCAL TITLE: EMERGENCY DEPT CLINICIAN NOTE STANDARD TITLE: PHYSICIAN EMERGENCY DEPT NOTE DATE OF NOTE: JUL 22, 2013022:18 ENTRY DATE: JUL 22, 2013022:18:36 AUTHOR: DIETRICH, MARTIN F EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED Time Seen: Jul 22,2013022:18 Historian: Patient Chief Concern: Mental Health (Suicidal, Homicidal, Depression, Substance Abuse)

History of Present Illness: $5\frac{1}{2}$ year old AAM, homeless, with h/o depression, cognitive disprder. polysubstance abuse who presents with expression of possible suicidal Ideation. I have interviewed the patient and he states that he will need a couple of days of rest or it may get too much for him and he may "hurt" himself. He denies any specific intent or plan. He does not have access to weapons. No previous history per patient. He denies blood draws and other somatic evaluation. Denies drug or alcohol use but refuses to be tested.

Review of Systems: All systems negative except:

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

DATE OF NOTE: AUG 08, 2013@14:36 AUTHOR: SETHUPATHI,ANANDHI URGENCY:

ENTRY DATE: AUG 08, 2013@14:36:14
EXP COSIGNER:
STATUS: COMPLETED

Pt came in as walk in today stating that he needs to see the SW because he wants to convey a message to the judge, and they will not let him. Pt reports being homeless, and using drugs. Refused rehab options for substances. appt to see SW today /es/ ANANDHI SETHUPATHI, M.D. Physician Signed: 08/08/2013 14:38

LOCAL TITLE: MH ATTENDING NOTE STANĐARD TITLE: MENTAL HEALTH ATTENDING NOTE DATE OF NOTE: JUL 25, 2013@13:55 ENTRY DATE: JUL 25, 2013@13:55:35 AUTHOR: ZAKI, NASIR EXP COSIGNER: ORGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED

• Chart reviewed, patient examined and management discussed with the IDTT.

This is a 56 yo with h/o Polysubstance abuse vs dep and depression NOS who presents on his own to the ED reporting vague SI. Admitted to 3 s for safety/stabilization.

Patient seen in team rounds today. Per staff, no acute events over night. Pt said his mood is still sad because of his situation. Heis eating well and sleeping failry ok. Getting along well with the staff and other patients. He is trying to get some help and aware that he has violated his probation and he has to deal with the consequences. He will meet with the PO for further advice. Veteran is recommended to go to AA &; NA meetings. Currently denies any SI, HI . Vet does not own a Firearm.

Pt verbalized positive plans for the future and stated that he wants to remain compliant with his treatment plan and maintain sobriety from abusing illegal drugs and Etoh. He also stated that if he were to feel depressed or suicidal/ homicidal again he would seek help immediately. All disciplines of the team concur that the pt is not suicidal, homicidal, psychotic or manic and as such is not a danger to self or others. He is medically stable and appears to be at his baseline from a psychiatric perspective. It was therefore decided to d/c pt today.

Advice to continue Zoloft 200 mg q am, Trazodone 100 mg q pm. Rsik /benefits discussed. Will recommend his out pt team to offer counseling for unresolved grief over the death of several family members in the past. . -->Medicval issues: Hep C, DM, HTN, HLD, S/P CVA: Continue current out pt

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

Recurrent falls: Circumstances of Fall- Patient injury -Yes Treatment required for injury-No Nurse Fall Risk Screen Information on gait/balance problems, lower limb problems, medications and vision changes from patient report and/or nurse's observation(s).

The educational handout; Fall Prevention at Home, developed by the National Center for Patient Safety, has been provided to the patient.

D Was in day room in wheelchair watching TV. He needs a shower and states he will take one tonight. Denies he will need assistance. He finally provided urine sample after being strongly encouraged and lots of water. Urine sent to lab for drug tox screen. He has ideas of suicide with no plan. He denies SI, HI, and AVH. He is stressed by his legal issues and parole officer. A Suicidal ideation, no plan P Provide secure and supportive environment, Monitor for medication effectiveness/complications. Provide assistance for ADLs as needed. /es/ CHRYSTYNA A. REYMANN, RN NURSE MANAGER TCU-B Signed: $07/23/201315:42$

LOCAL TITLE: MH INPT NOTE STANDARD TITLE: MENTAL HEALTH INFATIENT NOTE DATE OF NOTE: JUL 23, 2013@11:03 ENTRY DATE: JUL 23, 2013@11:03:05 AUTHOR: PAI, JASON R EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED MS3 MH Inpatient Note Subjective: Mr. Hardeman is a 56 yo aam living with his cousin Elaine, with history of depressive disorder, polysubstance abuse, cognitive disorder, Hep C, DM Type II, and a stroke on "right side" in 2009. He states that he has had memory troubles especially with names and dates since his stroke. He indicates he takes his medicines, including sertraline and trazodone. When asked why he was here, he reports that he was thinking of suicide, feeling "everything closing in", and needing time away from "all the stress". When asked why he came to MH walk-in clinic, but left and never returned, and then came to the ER, he responded by mentioning that his Probation officer in Beaumont didn't believe he had thoughts of suicide. He indicates that he has been receiving therapy with Platinum Team, and also on "Pine street" where he also receives rehab treatment for substance abuse. He reports that he doesn't drink, and has been clean for 45 days from weed and cocaine. He has been in rehab "2 times maybe". Mr. Hardeman reports problems with bringing up his past in therapy. He states that any woman close to

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

him has died, including his grandmother, mother, wife, daughter, and friend in rehab. He feels that he has never really dealt with this issue until now. When asked how long he has been seeing the therapist, Mr. Hardeman says he does not understand the question.

Objective:

Vitals: BP: 122/67 (07/23/2013 05:56) TEMP: 96.3 F [35.7 C] (07/23/2013 05:56) RESP: 22 (07/23/2013 05:56) PULSE: 81 (07/23/2013 05:56) WEIGHT: 200 lb [90.9 kg] (07/22/2013 21:18) HEIGHT: 74 in [188.0 cm] (07/22/2013 21:18) PAIN: 0 (07/22/2013 21:18) BMI: 26 Active Inpatient Medications (excluding Supplies): Active Inpatient Medications Status

1) ACETAMINOPHEN TAB 650MG PO Q4H PRN for pain ACTIVE 2) ALUM, MAG HYDROX/SIMETHICONE SUSP, ORAL 15ML ACTIVE

ALOH/MGOH/SINTH XTRA STRENGTH LIQ 30ML PO Q2H PRN AS NEEDED INDIGESTION 3) ASP GRIN TAB 325MG PO QDAILY

ACTIVE 4) BENZTROPINE INJ 1MG/1ML IM Q2H PRN for eps

ACTIVE 5) BENZTROPINE TAB 2MG PO Q2H PRN For EPS. NTE ACTIVE 6mg/24H. May give IM. 6) HALOPERIDOL INJ, SOLN 5MG/1ML IM Q2H PRN for ACTIVE agitation 7) HALOPERIDOL SOLN, ORAL 5MG/2.5ML PO Q2H PRN for ACTIVE severe agitation/psychosis. NTE $20\mathrm{m}\mathrm{g}/24\mathrm{h}$ . May give IM. 8) LISINOPRIL TAB 5MG PO QAM

ACTIVE 9) LORAZEPAM INJ 2MG/1ML IM Q2H PRN for anxiety ACTIVE 10) LORAZEPAM TAB 2MG PO ONCE PRN For severe agitation ACTIVE only. Give, then call MD. May give IM. 11) METFORMIN TAB, ORAL 500MG PO BID ACTIVE 12) MILK OF MAGNESIA SUSP, ORAL 30ML MAGNESIUM HYDROXIDE ACTIVE 405MG/5ML SUSP ML PO BID PRN FOR CONSTIPATION, NTE $60\mathrm{m}\mathrm{l}/24\mathrm{h}$ 13) SERTRALINE TAB 200MG PO QAM

ACTIVE 14) SIMVASTATIN (ZOCOR) TAB 40MG PO AT BEDTIME

ACTIVE 15) TRAZODONE TAB 100MG PO AT BEDTIME

ACTIVE Mental Status Exam: Appearance: Appropriate in hospital, attire, somewhat dishevelled

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

\author{ \author{ Professianal

}

}

Progress Notes

needs.

-->Dispo: He lives with his cousin in Arlington. Received NSC VA pension $1022/month. He last worked in 2009 environmental cleanup. He is on probation for robbery until 2022. He checks in with his probation officer once month. See SW discharge note and discharge summary for more details. /es/ NASIR ZAKI, MD STAFF PSYCHIATRIST Signed: $07/25/201314:04$

LOCAL TITLE: MH ATTENDING NOTE

STANDARD TITLE: MENTAL HEALTH ATTENDING NOTE DATE OF NOTE: JUL 24, 2013@14:06 ENTRY DATE: JUL 24, 2013@14:06:36 AUTHOR: ZAKI, NASIR EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED

Chart reviewed, patient examined and management discussed with the IDTT. This is a 56 yo with h/o Polysubstance abuse vs dep and depression NOS who presents on his own to the ED reporting vague SI. Admitted to 3 s for safety/stabilization.

Patient seen in team rounds today. Per staff, no acute events over night. Pt said his mood is still low. He said his probation officer believed he was trying to violate his probation. Toady, patient admitted smoking crack once before coming to the hospital ( UDS + for cocaine). He was clean for 45 days before that. We asked what we could do for him, and he said he'd like a couple more days of rest, and then he'd be able to face his problems. He said that his cousin would be back at home tomorrow, although yesterday he said she would be back home today. He said he'd like to wait until she returned before he went home. We suggested a shelter, but he said it was a problem for him physically. He would like to get all his meds because his bag was stolen before coming here. Currently denies any SI, HI . Vet does not own a Firearm.

Cooperative, alert, fair hygiene, good eye contact. No invol movements noted. Spech; slow, dysarthric. Mood :"depressed". Affect; calm. No overt psychosis or mania. Denies any SI,HI. Insight and judgement; fair.

A/P: This is a 56 yo with h/o Polysubstance abuse vs dep and depression NOS who presents on his own to the ED reporting vague SI &; inconsistent information as to what brought him to the hospital. He has limited social support, however

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

he is skilled at utilizing community and VA resources. Vet is on probation until 2022 for robbery. He has served 19 yrs. in prison for theft and possession of narcotics.

1. Safety: Pt denies any SI, continue q 15 minutes routine safety checks.
2. Polsubstance dep: Claims to be sober $\times 45$ days, admits smoking one hit of cocaine before coming here. . Went through two Substance abuse treatment in Houston in 2009 and at this VA in Nov 2012. 3.Depression NOS: Continue Zoloft 200 mg q am, Trazodone 100 mg q pm. Rsik /benefits discussed. Will recommend his out pt team to offer counseling for unresolved grief. 4.Medicval issues: Hep C, DM, HTN, HLD, S/P CVA: Continue current out pt meds.Pt to be examined by the hospitalist for a physical. 5.Discharge planning: He lives with his cousin in Arlington. Received NSC VA pension $1022/month. He last worked in 2009 environmental cleanup. He is on probation for robbery until 2022. He checks in with his probation officer once month. Likely discharge in a day or two. Will appreciate SW assistance in discharge planning. /es/ NASIR ZAKI, MD STAFF PSYCHIATRIST Signed: $07/24/201314:18$

LOCAL TITLE: MH MEDICATION REVIEW NOTE STANDARD TITLE: MENTAL HEALTH MEDICATION MGT NOTE DATE OF NOTE: JUL 23, 2013@10:41 ENTRY DATE: JUL 23, 2013@10:42:32 AUTHOR: FLINCHUM,MEGAN L EXP COSIGNER: MATHYS,MONICA L URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED *** MH MEDICATION REVIEW NOTE Has ADDENDA *** HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE is an 56-year-old AAM, non-combat veteran, w/ a h/o depression, polysubstance abuse, and cognitive decline since right-sided stroke in 2009. Patient recently homeless, but currently reports living in Arlington on his VA-based income (not SC).

Problem list:

1. Safety
2. Polysubstance abuse

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

Progress Notes

EX HYD ST

68162494

Feb 12, 2014

Learner Preference: Printed Material, One-on-One

Extremity Evaluation indicates: RUE: delts $2/5$ , biceps $2/5$ , triceps $1/5$ , wrist and hand. $0/5$ ; however, no isolated movement - only in synergy pattern, with increased flexor tone.

LUE: $5/5$ , AROM WFL RLE: HF $4/5$ , HE $4/5$ , quads $4/5$ , hams $3/5$ , DF $0/5$ , PF $1/5$ in synergy. Unable to dorsiflex in isolation at all. Movement in synergy patterns.

LLE: $5/5$ , AROM WFL Current Pain Scale: $0/10$ FIM (Functional Independence Measure) SCORES: (7=Ind., 6=Modified Ind., 5=Supervision/Set-up, 4=Minimal Assist., 3=Moderate Assist., 2=Max. Assist., 1=Dependent) Transfers: Mat <-> Wheelchair: FIM 5 Locomotion: W/C: FIM 5 Walk: FIM 4 Stairs: FIM 2 Balance Sitting: good Standing: fair to good A: Patient presents with ability to come to stand from wheelchair without physical assist other than supervision to contact guard. Requires assistance to use rolling walker to keep right hand on walker handle, but able to walk 160' without fatigue. Requires repeated verbal cues for gait pattern and to walk more slowly and focus on specifics of $R$ hip and knee flexion. Pt. tends to want to walk too fast; RLE has poor coordination and increased spasticity at this time. He scuffs RLE $95\%$ of the time.

Pt. able to go up and down 46 " steps using handrail with left hand, but has scissoring of $R$ foot when descending steps requiring hands-on assist for foot placement.

Pt. able to propel wheelchair with L foot and hand with supervision - needs more practice. Has likely been using wall handrails to pull himself in wheelchair to go downstairs to smoke.

Pt. performed BLE strengthening and RLE coordination activities on mat with better effort once rationale of exercises were explained to him.

Rehab potential is good. Functional Short Term Goals (1 week): Pt. will perform stand-pivot transfers to/from wheelchair/mat at modified independence - FIM 6. Pt. will walk 160' using assistive device with supervision, scuffing $R$ foot $50\%$ of the time - FIM 5. Pt. will go up and down 4 steps $\times 3$ using handrail with supervision - FIM 5.

Consult Requests

Page 507 www. com

Consult Requests

Activity CPRS RELEASED ORDER PRINTED TO RMS1$PRT SCHEDULED PM&;RS General 1499G Consult Appt. on 06/17/09 @ 11:30

COMPLETE/UPDATE Note# 26032520

Note: TIME ZONE is local if not indicated

LOCAL TITLE: PM&;R OUTPUTIENT CONSULT STANDARD TITLE: PHYSICAL MEDICINE REHAB CONSULT DATE OF NOTE: JUN 17, 2009@11:31 ENTRY DATE: JUN 17, 2009@11:31:59 AUTHOR: NEYCHERIL, ALICE NP EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED *** PM&;R OUTPUTIENT CONSULT Has ADDENDA *** PMR OUTPUTIENT CLINIC NOTE REVIEW OF SYSTEMS FOR THIS VISIT: S Pain:currently - right shoulder 5/10 elimination - normal appetite - good Functional review: falls: SEVERAL walking: USE 4 POINT CANE AND RIGHT FOOT AFO/BRACE stairs: NO STEPS ADL's; INDEPENDENT home equip: 4 point cane, rollator, w/c alert,orientated,answers questions app,

Allergies: PENICILLIN CURRENT MEDICATIONS Active Outpatient Medications Status

1) ASPIRIN 325MG TAB TAKE ONE TABLET BY MOUTH DAILY TO ACTIVE PREVENT BLOOD CLOT 2) BACLOFEN 10MG TAB TAKE ONE-HALF TABLET BY MOUTH THREE ACTIVE

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102 Printed at HOUSTON VAMC

| Current Pat. Status: | Outpatient | | :--: | :--: | | Primary Eligibility: | AID &; ATTENDANCE (VERIFIED) | | Patient Type: | NSC VETERAN | | OEF/OIF: | NO | | Order Information | | | To Service: | PROSTHETICS REQUEST - FOOTWEAR | | From Service: | ZZpc chukwu 5072s | | Requesting Provider: | CHITKARA, PRANAV | | Service is to be rendered on an OUTPATIENT basis | | | Place: | Consultant's choice | | Urgency: | Routine | | Earliest Appr. Date: | | | Orderable Item: | PROSTHETICS REQUEST - FOOTWEAR | | Consult: | Consult Request | | Provisional Diagnosis: | Stroke (436.) | | Reason For Request: | | | Foot Deformity | | | SEVERLY DEFORMED FOOT | | | Custom Orthopedic Shoe. | | | Pt with right foot drop and foot turns-over/sprains with walking. Needs | | | footwear or brace with ankle support to prevent sprain with walking. | | | Inter-facility Information | | | This is not an inter-facility consult request. | | | Status: | COMPLETE | | Last Action: | COMPLETE/UPDATE | | Significant Findings: | Unknown | | Facility | | | Activity | Date/Time/Zone | | CPRS RELEASED ORDER | 04/16/09 15:28 | | PRINTED TO PROS3$PRT | 04/16/09 15:28 | | ADDED COMMENT | 04/23/09 15:40 | | submitted for scheduling. | | | SCHEDULED | 05/06/09 08:44 | | PROSTHETICS II 1339 Consult Appt. on 05/13/09 @ 13:30 | | | DD FOR AFO | | | STATUS CHANGE | 05/13/09 13:22 | | PROSTHETICS II 1339 Appt. on 05/13/09 @ 13:30 was cancelled by the Patient. | | | Remarks: rescheduled | | | COMPLETE/UPDATE | 05/13/09 13:23 | | | |

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102 Printed at HOUSTON VAMC

| Current Pat. Status: | Outpatient | | :-- | :-- | | Primary Eligibility: | AID &; ATTENDANCE (VERIFIED) | | Patient Type: | NSC VETERAN | | OEF/OIF: | NO |

Order Information To Service: PROSTHETICS REQUEST - MEDICAL EQUIPMENT From Service: ZZpc chukwu 5072s Requesting Provider: CHITKARA, PRANAV Service is to be rendered on an OUTPUTIENT basis Place: Consultant's choice Urgency: Routine Earliest Appr. Date: $$ PROSTHETICS REQUEST - MEDICAL EQUIPMENT Orderable Item: $$ Consult Request Consult: $$ Stroke (436.) Reason For Request: Wheelchairs Above 20" - submit consult to the Wheelchair &; Specialty Seating Clinic Inter-facility Information This is not an inter-facility consult request.

| Current Pat. Status: | Outpatient | | :-- | :-- | | Primary Eligibility: | AID &; ATTENDANCE (VERIFIED) | | Patient Type: | NSC VETERAN | | OEF/OIF: | NO |

Order Information To Service: PM&R W/C &; POWERED MOBILITY EVAL From Service: ZZpc chukwu 5072s Requesting Provider: CHITKARA, PRANAV Service is to be rendered on an OUTPUTIENT basis Place: Consultant's choice Urgency: Routine Earliest Appr. Date: $$ PM&R W/C &; POWERED MOBILITY EVAL Orderable Item: $$ Consult Request Consult: $$ Stroke (436.) Reason For Request: Custom manual wheelchair evaluation. Other: Very tall, special wheelchair to accomodate height Inter-facility Information This is not an inter-facility consult request. Status: COMPLETE Last Action: COMPLETE/UPDATE Facility Activity Date/Time/Zone Responsible Person Entered By CPRS RELEASED ORDER $04/16/0915:28$ CHITKARA, PRANAV CHITKARA, PRANAV PRINTED TO RMS1$PRT $04/16/0915:28$ RECEIVED 04/17/09 10:33 SANDERS, BILLIE JE SANDERS, BILLIE JE COMPLETE/UPDATE 04/22/09 14:13 WAGNER, CHRISTI LY WAGNER, CHRISTI LY Note# 25420791 Note: TIME ZONE is local if not indicated

LOCAL TITLE: PROSTHETIC CONSULT STANDARD TITLE: ORTHOTICS PROSTHETICS CONSULT DATE OF NOTE: APR 22, 2009#14:09 ENTRY DATE: APR 22, 2009#14:09:24 AUTHOR: WAGNER, CHRISTI LYN EXP COSIGNER: URGENCY: STATUS: COMPLETED Consult received. Pt. was recently an inpatient on the rehab unit. This writer issued current w/c. Pt's primary method of mobility is walking with rollaider. His current w/c with cushion and $1/2$ lap tray meets his needs for

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102 Printed at HOUSTON VAMC

belief, positive problem solving skill Given the veteran's presentation at the time of this assessment and considering the above noted risk and protective factors, in my clinical judgment the veteran's current risk potential for suicidal behavior is:

MODERATE RISK. Patient judged to be at increased risk of suicide but not acutely dangerous to self.

PLAN OF CARE: Voluntary Admission offered and: Patient admitted. Plan/Risk Reduction: Hospitalize (voluntary or involuntarily) Increase treatment intensity (frequency of contact) Provide contact information regarding telephone numbers to clinicians, crisis help lines --------MEDICAL REVIEW OF SYSTEMS--------- Nutritional Assessment: Denies changes in appetite, significant weight gain or weight loss. General: Denies problems Head, Eyes, Ears, Nose and Mouth/Throat: Majority of top teeth are missing. Cardiovascular: Denies problems Respiratory: Denies problems Skin: Denies problems Musculoskeletal: $R$ hemiparesis, pain in great $R$ toe from $tx$ in podiatry today. GI: Denies problems. Self reported $hx$ of Hepatitis C Neurologic: CVA 2009. Right sided weakness. continued deficits over the R upper and lower extremities with paralysis of the upper extremity and foot drop of the

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical Imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

VISTA Electronic Medical Documentation

Printed at NORTH TEXAS HCS

NOTES

ACTUAL A Innocent Person, and He was mental incompetent To make Any field of that. See, Extroor

${}^{15}$ M H and Extroor Notion To Revoks Problem Hebrands and Sententious, Reported

${}^{15}$ Record, P63. 6, 11-11, 21- $22,25-30,33$ ) See, Exhort wosley Ronald Tuley 109 Sw. 30.388,

'Willie Eugene Hardeman is referred to in the judgments as "Willie Eugene Hardeman AKA Willie E Hardeman[.]"

${}^2$ Hardeman may challenge our decision in these cases by filing a petition for discretionary review. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

PATIENT NAME AND ADDRESS (Mechanical imprinting, if available) HARDEMAN, WILLIE EUGENE 1518 EAST LANCASTER FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76102

Case Details

Case Name: Hardeman, Willie Eugene

Court Name: Court of Appeals of Texas

Date Published: Feb 20, 2015

Docket Number: PD-1602-14

Court Abbreviation: Tex. App.