Stone, Alfred Lee
WR-22,735-47
Tex. App.
Jul 21, 2015
Check Treatment
Case Information

*1

In the united States District Court For the Northern District of Texas Dallas-Divisian 22, 735-47 Alfred lee Stone Cause 142. Department The Court of Criminal Appeals Respondent.

Petition for Review

in Dunsurave to FeA A. Civ. prace. A. - the petitioner. Realtest of this Lis. District Ccunt to Review the Under of the Ccunt of Criminal App. Esto that was Entered by 22 f. - 122.

Alfred lee Stone Stable Petitioner. EStelle Luvif 244 fM 8474 Hensisville Texas 77320 ce: Ccunt of Criminal Appetits of Texas p. 2 . 80 x 12304

Capitul Stat 10 N Autin Texas 78711

*2

list of parties

Alfred lee Stude 549605 EStelle UNiT 264 FM 3479 Huntoville TEXAS 77320 Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas D. 8. Box 12308

Capitul Statids Austin TEXAS 78711 the Court of Appeals Fiffill District of Texas at DANas Gentule I. Ames 5n. Comis building Cult Commerce Street. Suite 200 DANAS TEXAS 75202

*3

Tablo of Cuntenis

  1. Identify of Dantes
  2. Tablo of Cuntenis
  3. Index of Autinuities
  4. Starkenit of the Case
  5. Issue отмеsеител
  6. Starkenit of Faci
  7. Starkenit of Jurisdiction
  8. Summanu of Anqumest
  9. Anqumest

Qumund-ure

  1. Quayek -Certificare of Service Appendix (A) the Cuunt of crimina Appens Mernunandum-Opinion (B).the Drijiual Mandamus. (C) the Reizuest of Respond of the Mandamus. (D).the Appellans Oineci Appent Brief. The Starkenit of Facts Fном CAuse nD, F-91-42452-nI.

*4

Table of Contents

Apperdix

(10) THE THiNl TRANSCTipT-FHUM F91. 42452 NIT. THE 5TH CIINT OF Appents Memorandum, Lipinitu. Any AOMUNiSH MENIT-HENIIWQS. And other Dreders, Henniws, LIBINiDUS THAT WAS EnTented by THE 5TH CIINT OF Appents.

*5

Incles of Authorities

Case

  1. Armsínunf. 390 us 345.
  2. BuHn 139 F 3d 913.
  3. Frasek 552 3im 2d At 394.
  4. Juzeph 7315 im 2d At 998.
  5. MUHANe 339 u.s. 306.
  6. ViliAnuel 970 s.w 2d 275.
  7. AAlwwaten 6345 u 2 d At 69.
  8. Audd 6165 u 2 d 623.
  9. 3MEIdan 765 s.w 2d 843.
  10. welen 533 s.w 2 d 180.

UfHers

  1. V.T.C.A. QuVimeur Code of 22, 221 (A) VENNUN 3 (1999).

U.S. CUNST. I. U.S.C.A. CUNST. Amend. 19 m . 2. U.S.C.A. CUNST. Amend. 5 fH.

TEX. CUNST.

  1. TEX. CUNST. ANT. I of 19.
  2. TEX. CUNST. ANT. I of 10.
  3. TEX. CUNST. ANT. 9 of 9 .

*6

STATE MENT OF THE CASE ON UN ABOUT THE 4-121-15 THE PETITID- NCH Filed And Uniquimal ApplicatiOn FON WUIT OF MAKEDANUS INTO THE CQUNT OF CHIMIMAL ABO EAS ADAINS? THE FIFTH CQUNT OF ABPEAS AT OARIAS FON THERE FAILURE TO WIIM CHANM THERE MAKEDATE, AND THERE AFTER THE CQUNT OF CHIM- IMAL ABPEAS IS IS MISSED THE ABOIICATION ON 22-1-15. AND THE PETITIONEN Filed FON A MUTIDN FON ACHEMINUQ/ AECONSIDENTI- ON ON THE 4-12215. AND THE MUTIDNS WERE IS MISSED ON 4-12215. SO, NUW THE PETiT- ION IS DOFONE THIS CQUNG TO CHAIMINUQ THE CQUNT OF CHIMIMAL ABPEAS IS IS MISSA OF His ApplicatiOn FON MAKEDANUS.

ISSUE PRESENTED 1. DENIAL OF due DUEEESS.

STATEMENT OF FAET THE PETITIONEN WAS INTIFIED TO A HERE INC TO PRESENT HIS DUPETiON TO AVOID THE CQ- UNT OF CHIMIMAL ABPEAS IS IS MISSA WIIM DUE A UNITEN UNDER.

STATEMENT OF JUNIS CIICIIUN THIS CQUNI HAS JUNIS CIICIIUN UNDER FED. H. CIV. DUE. K.

*7

SUHIMANIL OF THE AMELUMENT

THE MEMBRANDUM-ADIIGUN ENTERED BY THE COURT OF CIIMINA! Appetls is IN VIDIITION UF THE DIDERCLIIMAL- dUE DIDGESS CLAUSE because the pEtitiunien was NUT Given And BppurTunity TO DResent His DIDIERTiUN tO AVDIC THE D10MISSEL WITH DUT A WJnITEN Ue. dine Result. Such as Ileaking.

EspeciATly Here in A Factualty, leght CENpilicated SITUATION IN UHICH THE EVIDEN Ce And the IAU THAT SUPPLIPS IT IS IN FAVIR UF THE DETITIONER CLAiN.

*8 Lipulind. are. Denial of due process of law Suppurting -Facts The Court of Criminal Assets Has DismisSed the DefiTianers Quigismceding. NANe1y Mandands wint out A HeavicQ. And this Case ed A procedural. due. process ViDntion under the STH, 14 III u.s.c.A. EmuSt. Amend. SEE 6 unks 139 F3d 313. Amsthiny v Manzd 330 us 543 Also SEE ExHibit A. TEX. Comst. Ani. I of 19

Standard of Review A procedural-due- process ViDlntion Decuss ullen A Trial an Appents Court Denies NUticr And the Uppuntunity to be Heand at A Meaningful- Time And in A Meaningful Manner. SEE Amsthony v Manzd 36 S.CI. AT 1191330 us 545 E.Q. Mullane 399 u.S. 306 us.cA evost. Am. End StH, 14 III TEX. Emst Ant. I of 19.

Applicatiun of Standard Here the Court of Criminal Appents Memor Andum-ipiniondensies the Defitiuners Quigism uvit of Mandands wint out A Heaviny And An Expressed ulnitien Reasorn. SEE Appendix -

*9 Fok NUT EXERCISING IT'S JUNISCICIIUN TQ EN FUICE THE 5TH CUMM UF Appetls TQ Aespond to TME Driqumin whit of Mandanuts see Agoendix

SQ THAT IOTM THE DEIITIONEN ANd TME CU UNI DF CIIMINAN Appetls QUNT HAVE TQ QIless THE ReASUN WUHY THE 5TH CUMM UF Appetls WJANY WIIM dHAU it's MANUArE ATHINOT HIM. SEE SHIEDUN 76554222943... FUASER 9525422247544 .1005. E3OH 7315422247544.

WIIile HAVINY THE JUNISCICIIUN TQ QD 30 SEE V.T.C.A. QuVennment Code of 22.221 (A) (VENNUN 1988) .. TEX. CUNOT. ANI 5 f 6

ANUUNTS TQ A clue process ViDIITION because the Judgment EWtened denied the petitioner of the EIEMENTANy And FundAMENTAL-Refui. nement of clue process As in Any ondeediny wHICH is to be Accueded FinMily.

SICH AS THE UppuNTUNITY TQ DHESENT His DidectiJns TQ Avdid MAH AEsUIT. See VILANHEII 5705422275 . MUTIANUE 339 U.S. 306 , AMMSTAD. NY 390 U.S 545.

WY MENnD OF A HeAniney.

*10 Aucund Ius clenial of One pucass of IAm supplninal fates. THE FIFTH CUUNI OF Appetts of Texas at OADAS DISMISSED THE Appellant Diujinal Direct- Appell-Enief THAT WAS Filed by His ATunney an -1-1-110 Cause NU. 85-91-1832 AFFER THE Appellani Filed His dUAn pnI-SE- BRIEF IN Addition to the brief Filed by His CQunsel an -1 - see RAIN WATER 634 3.10, 2d at 68 . Hene Affer the CUUNI of Appetts Enfered There Memurandum Ipinion Based on the pnI- SE- BRIEF. BuI Since there is No Aight to Hylo- rid-Appresentation on Appell, the pnI-SE- BRIEF presented NUTHINU For Reviell. SEE AuEd V OATE 616 3U2d 623 TEX. CR. App. 1961 so THE Appell was MEANINUlless Affer the dis Missal of the Drijinal Direct Appell brief. Standard of Reviell pricedural due process occurs when a Trial on Appetts CUUNI Denies notice on the app. DITUNITY TO be Heand at a MenninUf FU, IINE And IN A MENNINUf FU MAINUER. SEe ARMSTRUNG U MA-

*11 N2d 83 3.CI. Al 1191 33d us 345 E.Q. MUMANe 399 us 306 U.S.C.A. CUNST. ANENd 3741414 . TEX CUNST. ANI I f 19 f 10.

Application of Standard the 3TH CUUNt of Appents ViDlared the Appell Ani clue process Aighis by Reliug UN the pHdSE bnief in SteAd of the Direct Appell bnief Filed by His CUUNSEl, because the pHd-SE bnief WAS NUII pnOpenly presenred before the CUUNt of Appents for Reviell, SEE WELDD V STATE 3333,42 2d 730 .

  1. the Direct Appell WAS NUII MENninuuf Ful, I.O. ANNSTHUNG.

And EYew if the AppellAnis pud-SE-bnief WAS pnOpenly presenred before the CUUNt of App EAls. The CUUNt would be fanced to: "AdmanisH the Appelland 30. He CUuld Make A KNquing, in fellig. EnI And Vd KunTAwy WAiven Uf His Aighi to AsSistAnce of CUUNSEl And The Aighi to Appell pud-SE. TEX, CUNST. ANI. I f 10 . f 19. U.S.C.A. CUNST. ANiend. 374 14 711 SEE UIIS WELDD V STATE 333342 2d 730.

*12

Driagern

THAT THIS CULUT ENFUHCA THE CILUT AF CHIMINA! ACOOAS tD Huld A HEAKING UN HIO CHIGIIIGM MAUDAHUS DnUceeding And the Quest the FiftM CILUT AF Appenl to Respond UN THE CHIGIIGAL-MAUDAHUS AoplicatiUts.

CERTIFICATE UF SERVICE

I AIFHed lee STUHue pEtitiUHEN dU Hene key CERTIFY THAT A TME COPHE AF THE PESTITIM FOK REVIEN! HAS bEEN U.S. MAiled tD: U.S. GTS TIICI CZENK. U.S. GISTHICI CUUT NUHTHEEN! GISTHICT UF TEXAS IIDD COMMENCE ST. RUDNA. 1452. GAHAS TEXAS 75242 UN THIS 13 dAY AF JUN 20.15 .

AIFHed lee STUHue petitiUHEN

*13

Applenclix

*14

(A)

The Ciluni of Criminal Appests Memorandum - Opinion