Williams, Bobby v. State, PD-1139-15

Williams, Bobby v. State

PD-1139-15

| Tex. App. | Sep 2, 2015

Check Treatment

Case Information

RECEIVED

AUG 282015 COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTSFFTEEAPHE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF AUSTIN TEXAS

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF AUSTIN TEXAS TO FILE APPLALANT PETITION FOR DISERCTIONARY REVEN THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS: COMES NOV, Bobby WILLIAMS APPEALANT, PRO-SE WHO WAS COHVICTED OF THE OFFENSE OF FAILURE TO REVIVER AND SENTENCED ON 29th - JUNE 2015, EN CRIMINAL CASE NUMBER 1379744D STSLED THE STATE OF TEXAS VS. BObby WILLIAMS EN THE 2nd DISTRICT COURT OF TRERANT COUNTS TEXAS. APPLALANT MOVES THE COURT TO EXTEND THE TIME FOR FICING His PETITION FOR DISERCTIONARY FROM PRESENT READLINE OF SEPTEMBER 20th FILLDIN, LE THROUGH, AN ADJ REDEVENDAN 90 dANS SEP 022015 A NEW DEROLINE OF LEECHTNER 20th 2015 SEP 022015 Abel Acosta, Clerk

*2 APPEALLANT HAS NO PRIOR EXTEN SISNS IN This MArter ANd THEREFE SHOULD BE ALLOWED AN EXTENTION IN ORDER TO PRETARE His PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEN. MORON FOR NEW TRIAL WAS Filed ON JUN-15-2015 AND OVERRULED ON THE 20th JAN OF AUGUST 2015.

APPEALLANT WAS RETRESENTED IN TRIAL COURT BY A COURT APPENIED ATTENEY WITH RETASE TO PRESENT THE TRIAL COURT WITH His MENTRE ILLNESS HITVEY AT THE TIME OF THE PEAR RARSIN HERBING. APPEALLANT HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY CLASIFIED IN COMPETENT AND SPENT FIVE MONTHS IN THE STATE HOSATAL. APPEALLANT did NOT WIDERSHOLD THE COURT PROCEDURE AND CONTINUITY INPREMED His LANGER OF His LACK OF UNDERSTANDING. APPEALLANT'S COURT APPENIED ATTENEY RETRESENTATION WAS INEFFECTIVE AT THE TIME OF TRIAL COURT APPENIEDD ATTENEY SURFY INSTRUDED APPEALLANT TO SAY YES TO EVERY THIR THE JUOSE ASKY YOU. APPEALLANT WAS IN A DRISED LIFE dRISE FEEM MEDICATION THAT IS PRESCADED TO him. APPEALLANT ECEQUET AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESEARCH his CASE TO PRESENT VALIDARY AND ATTENTUNITY TO RESEARCH VALD ATTENTUNITY TO PRESENCE

APPEALLAM is WITHIN THE LEEAK ADMINED TME ALLOWED BY LAW TO RECIENT AN EXTERLION OF TIME TO FILE his RETITAL FOR DISERVANTARY REVIEN.

PRAYER WheREtore, APPEALLAM PRAYS TME THE TIME FOR FUNG THE RETITAL FOR DISERVANENT REVIEN IN THE CAVE OF CRUMINAL APPEALS OF ALSON TENN BE EXTENDED FROM, SEPTEMBER 2014 JOIS TO DECEMBER 2014 JOIS

Golling William

APPEALTAM PRe-SE

$\frac{8 - 25 - 15}{D DATE}$

Verification of Unaworn Declaration

Robby Hilums

Defendant pro se in this cause, state the following under penalty of perjury: I am a prizons: 0861210 currently incarcerated in the Tarrant Countr Jall in Tarrant Counry, Texas I am duly qustified and authorized in all respects to make this declaration. I have read the foregoing MORAL F5A EXTENIOR OF

Tons

and declare that I have personal knowledge of the facts contained therein and said facts are true and correct.

EXECUTED in Tarrant County, Texas, pursuant to An 132.001 et seq., Texas C.P.R.C. and 28 USC $$ 1746$ , on this 25 day of August 20, is

Robby HILums

Signature; Defendatit pro se Robby Hilums (From Nann; CID 0861310 DOB 9:21 1962 Lbo NORT LAMme ST Fabric F5A NORT TEXs 76126 *Under both federal law ( 28 USC $$ 1746$ ) and state law (Art. 132.001, Texas C.P.R.C.), inmates incarcerated in Texas may use an unaworn declaration under penalty of perjury in place of a written declaration sworn before a notary public.

*5 Rably willow, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above motion was served on Attorney for the State Sharon Wilson by mailing via first class mail to SHARON WILSON, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, 401 W. BELKNAP ST., FORT WORTH, TX 76196 on this as say of August 26th

Ridley L. Allman [Defendant's Name], Defendant Pro Se CID6861210 DOB 912111963 100 N. Lamar St. Fort Worth, TX 76102-1954

COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00232-CR

Bobby Williams V.

The State of Texas § From Criminal District Court No. 2 § of Tarrant County (1399744D) § August 20, 2015 § Per Curiam § (nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS PER CURIAM