Case Information
*1 SENRICK S. WOLKERSON I BESING Ramses I Unit 1100 FM 655 7E-2-1TT Rosharon, TX 77583 May 21, 2015 - Remated on June 15, 2015 Courts of Criminal Appeals SupremeCourt P.O. Box 12308
Austin, Texas 78711 Re: Appeant's document enclosed Dear Court of Appeals, Could you please copy all six (b) pages, and the attached exhibit A, and mail it to Dallas County because they tend to destroy, or loose notions that I submit to them. I have enclosed a postage paid adressed envelope addressed to Pelicia Ptre District Clerk, and the a returned address from this Honorable Court. Thanks in adume for your time in advance. Plessedate stamp before this court forwards such documents.
Sincerely, and Mr. As, Please safeguard my Liberty RECEIVED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS JUN 092015 ADVANCOSS, Clerk
*2 ST. PARTE SENARICK WUWARSON
IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT No. 3 DALLAS COUNTRY TREATS
AFPLICANIT'S RESPONSE AND OBJECTIONS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS TO THE STATE'S RESPONSE TO APPLICATION FOR HYSPOTIN CRIMINS
There is a major concern with Jurisdiction in regards to FEB 60213 Compelling Prostitution, FIO-2183 Sexual Performance by a Child, FIO-2183 FIO-2184 Sexual Result on a Child, because the motion for new trial was granted on January 5, 2011.
CASE HISTORY
The foets are evidenced that malpracticed defense counsel Calvin D. Johnson was deficient and ineffective because he purposely failed to make any objections when prosecutor broke in Gross-Nob Pited motions to consolidate cause nos. FIO-2183 & FIO-2184; with cause nos. FEB 60213. Brooke Gross-Nob’s fraudulently forged the indictments from cause nos. FIO-2183 & FIO-2184 because these flistled cases were never once taken before any magistrate judge or grandjury. Both cases are fainted and fraud because Applicant was never once arrested and never once arranged for them. But the State is showing fraud/different arrest dates that never once were executed.
Dallas County District Clerk’s office will not provide Applicant with any files records, et cetera, in order to properly provide the preponderance of proof needed to provide that Applicant is illegally incarcerated for crimes that he never once committed; never was arrested for; and never was arranged for.
Ineffective lawyer, Calvin D. Johnson never filed any motions for cause nos. FIO-2183 & FIO-2184. The illegal trial began on 12/11/2010, and Calvin Johnson made 20 efforts to move for any pre-trial hearing, and he told Applicant that he was not allowed to have any witnesses, and he could not have his family attend the trial. Calvin Johnson assured Applicant that judge Keith Dean would get mad and give him 60 years.
The State continues to complain on how Applicant continues to file his 11.07 Writs of Habers Corpus, in regards to there being procedures, but the State broke and violated its cunn rules, and laws of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedures, and Laws of the United States Constitution. Applicant was never once arrested and never once arranged for cause nos. FIO-2183 & FIO-2184; totally violating Applicant’s due process of law rights, civil rights, and his constitutional rights due to the fact that Applicant was never once taken before any magistrate judge.
Page 1 of 6
*3
to be formerly apriised of both fraudulent cases, he was never given any opportunity to post-bad, never informed of his rights to an examining trial, never informed of his rights to counselor of his choice, and never once participated in any first preliminary initial apparances for both tainted sexoffenses, as is required by Texas law. See Articles 15,17 & 26,09 Code Cim. Pcce. The State has no Jurisdiction ever cause nos. F000183 & F000189 due to, the fact that there were never any arrest made, and never any arrangements met. The State has no Jurisdiction after cause no. F000283 because of January 5, 2011, Judge Keith Dean granted the motion for no trial.
AFPLICANT WAS DEVIED EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL IN VIOLATION OF UNITED STATES CONSITUTION AMEUDMENTS
VI. XIV.
A federal court must first determine whether the Applicant's claim was "adjudicated on the merits," in State Court, 28 U.S.C. 82259 (2). Despite the fact that the State trial court improvidently dismissed the entire state habers unit. Actually, the trial court is not CIC No. 3, If was Auxiliary Court No. 7, However, it must still be presumed that the State, by and through Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, adjudicated each claim on the merits in the absence of any indication or state law procedural principles to the contrary. Harrington U. Richter 1315.Cf. 178 (2011), It should be noted that Texas Courts authority to issue a unit of habers corpus stems from Article V, 85 of the Texas Constitution. This means that habers Jurisdiction does not stem from the Statutes regulating the exercise of that Jurisdiction, but from the Constitution itself. There are no cases on whether section 4 (VACC. 8 II.07) provides the exclusive exceptions for subsequent applications, and since it does not cause all aspects of common law abuse of the unit, it is unlikely that it would be held to have superceded the common law doctrine. And in any event, the State of Texas has not suggested abuse of the unit.
Insofar as the trial court misstated and misapplied the law in the dismissal of the State habers Unit, she denied the Applicant equal protection and due process of law for, falling or refusing to consider the full range of U.A.C.C.P, art 8(1.07(2)) applicability as her basis for the improvident dismissal. This falling in State law procedural principle will require cle now review for violation of the U.S. Court. Amends, 7 I and XIV., Section 2259 (2X2), See, generally, Panetti V. Quarterman 551 U.S. 930,953 (2001) (Noting that when a State Court's adjudication of a claim is based on an UNREGSONABLE application of federal law, a federal court must then "Resolve the claim without deference AEON otherwise requires"). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals thus adopted the trial Court's misstatement of law in its subsequent denial violating clearly established federal laws Page 2 of 6.
*4
requiring equal protection and due process laws. U.S. Const. Amords, III and XIV Congress did not intend for interpretation of phrase "second or successive," as used in the LAEDPAI Revision curtailing availability of successive habeas. Corpus applications to prettude federal district courts from providing relief for alleged procedural due process violations.37,
Because the State's huzest court adopted the trial courts "inadequate state bar procedural bar," a federal court conducts a review de now. The restrictions of section 2254 (d) are inapplicable because the State's use of improper statutory analyses was not compress' intertian either in the state or federal courts when considering all ousences for succusive habeas writs, The Caut. Supra., 28 USCA 82244 (a); 784. ST. Const., ART.I, 85.
In any eivend Texas' ultimate conclusion that counsel did not render ineffective assistance of counsel is not a factual finding to which the presumption of correctness applies, but is a legal question that must be reviewed de now. United States V. Infante 404 F. 2d 376, 341 (57Cic. 2005) calling Strikland V. Washington 104 S.C. 2052 (F891); Evitts V. Lucey 469 U.S. 387, 346 (F885); Douglas V. California 372 U.S. 353, 357 (463) U.S. Const. Amords, III, XIV. For this reason, the hadings in Hamington V. Rebles, supra, are inapplicable to this analysis, having established why section 28 U.S.C.A. 82244 (a) EREDPAI is inapplicable to the Ireland Application, Applicont now demonsttrates why Section 2254 are inapplicable to the individual claus.
ENEFFECTIVE RESISTANCE OF COUNSEL (CRIVIN D. JOHNSON)
The Fistual or legal basis for Applicont's claim was, and are univailable when previous applications were filed because the State will not provide Applicont with the records, files, et extolera; and for the violation of the United State's Constitution no rational juror could have found Applicont quiltly beyond a reasonable doubt; that the the trial Court in Auxiliary Court No. 7 known that inefiective counsel Calvin Johnson acted totally unprofessionally by allowing Applicont to be tried in an illegal trial for cause nos. F0-21832. Aodirey known that Applicont was never ene arrested, or an raligned for thorn. Ineffective Calvin Johnson purposely failed to object to the complainant (exity) Rae Austin's tainted, perjured, and coerced testimony when the totally lied under oath on 12/15/2010; testifying that Applicont pulled a gun on her and raped her withouth. London, Counse's failure to object caused the jury to believe that Applicont did pull a gun on (exity) Austin, and raped her. When the State does not have any police report, no of ferise reports, no arrest reports, and no physical or DNA of any rape or alleged gun. The outcome of the illegal trial Page 3 of 6.
*5 would have been different had Calvin Johnson objected to such lies, and told the jury, "Sennick, Wilkerson has never once owned a gun and never once had any physical or sexual contact with Destiny Austin. Also, the are no arrest affidavils from the state that even subject any of these tainted testimones by Complanard." Also, the outcome would have been different in the illegal trial, had ineffective Calvin Johnson made an objection before the jury, and the Judge, and said, "Your Honor, Sennick, Wilkerson should not be tried for cause nos. FIDOLIES B FIDOLIES because the State failed to exercise due diligence in arresting him for both cases. And he was never once arranged for them as well. "There would have been an agudal due to the prosecutorial misconducts, the fraud, the falsifying of government documents, and for violations of due process of law.
Alvin Johnson rendered ineffective assistance if caused by his failure to investigate; he purposely failed to file for Dis- sure for cause nos. FIDOLIES and FIDOLIES; he purposely failed to file any mations for them; he purposely failed to conduct a pretrial hearing; he purposely failed to contact any of Appicant's witnesses; he told Appicant that he was not allowed to have any witnesses and that Appicant's family members were not allowed to come to that illegal trial. The Record experiences such facts and the outcome to the illegal trial would have been different if ineffective counsel would have contacted Appicant's witnesses, and conducted an independent investigation. The outcome would have been different had Calvin Johnson mixed for a pretrial hearing with Appicant present because Appicant would have made objections before the trial. Judge on his own, in regards to the fraudulently ferred, and tainted sex offenses from cause nos. FIDOLIES B FIDOLIES; and to the alleged gun. The incomplete record from cause nos. FIDOLIES B FIDOLIES; and to the alleged gun. The incomplete record from cause nos. FIDOLIES, FIDOLIES B FIDOLIES will prove that Appicant never owned any gun, and that Appicant never committed any crimes against Destiny the Austin. If the jury had known that Appicant was never once arrested, and never once ever arranged; and that the prosecutor forse/fraudulently those indutments in cause nos. FIDOLIES B FIDOLIES, Appicant would have never been illegally tried or convicted period. There is no jury/juror in their right minds would allow a BLACKMAN to be illegally convicted for crimes that stress, and have never been presented before any magistrate judge or grand jury.
*6 In any event howis it possible for Applicant to adequately argue his illegal conuictions, when the State will not provide Applicant with any files, documents, Records, offense reports, arrest reports, Discovery, transcripts, et cetera, From cause nos, above? (Fo86225, Fiooues &; Fiooues), The State continues to allege that Applicant is not following the guidelines to the 11.07 rules; when the State totally violated the entire Texas Code of Criminal Procedures; violated Applicant's Civil &; due process of law rights, and his constitutional rights, How is it at all possible for Applicant to submit 'by a preponderance of evidence'? Applicant has requested the Records, et cetera since January of 2011, and to this date he has been unsuccessful. Why is it at for the State to get away with fraudulently forgoing indictments; falsifying documents; falsifying four (1) arrest dates for FIOO183 &; FIOO189; falsifying PR/word receipts; not having any Arrest Reports; not having arrest affidavits; not having any complaint affidavits; not having probable cause info; and not having any amalgament information. This clearly evidences Malpractice, deficiency, and ineffectible assistance of counsel by and through Calvin D. Johnson see Exhibit A, which is a copy of the signed affidavit from the States withss Terti Jennings. If the 12 jurors that were selected had known of Calvin Johnson's malpractices and his unprofessionalism, Applicant could have neler been illegal convicted. The State is making ever attempt to continue to cover-up their own misconducts, the prosecutorial misconduct, the Police Dept. &; County Sheiff's misconducts, and their falsifying of government documents, The trial transcript will evidence has state's witness Terti Jennings testified that prosecutor Brooke B. Gron-Robb attempted to coerce her into testifying falsely, by saying that Applicant made her prostitute and took her money. Jennings told the jury exactly what Brooke Gron-Robb attempted to coerce her into saying, Of course Gron-Robb lied, and say she neler attempted to coerce Terti Jennings Grona-Robb called Regina Sinclair to Count on October 9, 2010, and tried to coerce her into giving false testimony. The trial doetel sheet for cause. No F086223 will evidence sukn fact. However, Regina Sinclair told Grona-Robb that she was not going, Le for her, and that's why Grona-Robb never called Sinclair to testify. Applicant told defense counsel, and he did nothing. Page s of
*7
Regina Sinclair had even made several attempts on calling in the Calvin Johnson, but he purposely failed to answer or return her calls. Soy Adkins attempted to call Calvin Johnson to inform him that she wishes to testify, and she even came to the Court building on 12/17/2010. Agdin, Calvin Johnson did absolutely nothing! The State allowed this sham illegal trial to take place just so that they could earn another illegal and wrongful conviction.
The will continue to recommend Applicant's applications to be dismissed because Dallas County knows that they are guilty of fraud, perjury, and falsifying government documents. Applicant is entitled to a new trial, an exoneration, and an agnition of all three(s) offenses above due to the fact that the motion for new trial was granted on January 5, 2011. Relief in the interest of justice must be granted immediately. If Applicant's claims hold on merit, then prove it in an Evidentiary Hearing,
Respectfully submitted, SENRICK WINTERSON (BBS146 Ramsey I Unit 1100 FME 655 7E-2-177 Rosharon, 7277583
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on May 21,2015, the Foregoing document has been U.S. mailed to: Court of Criminal Appeals, R.A. Box 12308, Austin, 72 78711 &; Applicant has enclosed a postage paid envelope for the Court of Criminal Appeals to make a copy of the Applicant's six (6) page document, and forward it to the Dallas County District Clerk's office, in order to proye that they received the above document because Dallas County's District Clerk's office continues to ignore Applicant's motions &; RQings. (Exhchit 4 included) SUNRICK WINTERSON Page 6 of 6
*8
AFFIDAVIT
I, Terri Jennings, residing in Dallas County, do state that I am over the age of 18 years old, and am competent to state the following facts:
On December 13,2010, at Taco Bueno resturant, located on Lemmon Ave., I witnessed defense attorney Calvin D. Johnson, tell Senrick Wilkerson, that he would loose his law license if anyone found out that counselor Johnson was aware of his client being tried without being arrested, and never once arraigned for the latter two charges of, F10-01183 Sexual Performance by a Child &; F10-01184 Sexual Assault on a Child.
I also witnessed defense counselor Johnson, advise Mr. Wilkerson to leave the state and to not show up for the trial, that had began on December 14,2010. Mr. Johnson clearly stated, that he would not win the trial.
I, Terri Jennings, currently residing in Dallas County, delcare under penalty of perjury that, according to my belief, the facts stated in this documnet are true and correct.