Case Information
*1
STEVEN J. GILBERT # 423645 TDCJ-ID ELLIS UNIT 1687 FM 980 Rd. Huntsville, Texas 77243
January 28, 2015
TO: THE COURT OF CRTMINAL APPEALS ABEL ACOSTA, CLERK P.O. BOX 12308
CAPITOL STATION AUSZIN, TEXAS 78712
Re: Habeas Corpus Writ and
Dear Clerk, Enclosed please find my objection to the Trial Court's findings and conclusions in this habeas corpus proceeding, will you please present this to the court for a consideration in the matter prior to it's final decision in this case.
Thank you kindly, I so.
Sincerely, Steven D. Gilbert #423646 Applicant
CC: files CCA C1k.
RECEIVED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS FEB 042015
Abel Acosta, Clerk
*2 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS
EX PARTE STEVEN DWAYNE SILBERT APPLICANT
- TRIAL No. 6754-I,6755I
- CCA No. WR-17,545-19, and 17,545-20
APPLICANT'S OBJECTION TO THE TRIALCCOURI'S FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
TO THE JUDGES OF THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS:
COMES NOW, Applicant, Gilbert, who brought this habeas corpus writ, pursuant to Article 11.07, V.A.C.C.P., and on August 14, 20, 4, the state responded by stating that nothing was wrong with applicant's sentence... The trial court adopted the state's argument, and recommended that the writ be denied. On October 15, 2014, the Court of Criminal Appeals remanded the habeas writ, back to the trial court after deciding that the claim, if true, might entitle applicant to reloif, and ordered the trial court to make a finding and conclusion as to the claim by applicant that he had been denied that time credits for time spent in jail pursuant to pre-revoçation parole warrants. On January 27, 2015, the trialcourt issued it's findings and conclusions claiming that it found no unresolved issue with the calculation of applicant's sentence and the trial court again recommended that the habeas writ be denied.
APPLICANT'S OBJECTION Applicant objects to the findings and conclusions by the trial court whereas applicant states that the trial court has made a misapplication of the facts in this habeas writ.
(1)
*3 THE FACTS AND THE EVIDENCE
The facts were not disputed by the state, that applicant cannot be denied flat time credits for time spent confined pursuant to an issuance of a pre-parole revocation warrant. See Ex Parte Canada, 754 S.W. 2d 660. However, the trial court issued it's findings of facts pursuant to an Affadavit by Charley Valdez, the Supervisor III, for the Classification and Records Department of TDCJ-ID. Applicant alleges that Mr. Valdez's affadivat was and is not an official document reliable or truthful to make a de novo hearing one of fairness. In applicant's habeas filings he presented reliable evidence to support his claim, that evidence consisting of official documents showing without question or dispute that he had been wrongfully denied his fat time credits.
THE EVIDENCE:
In this habeas corpus proceeding applicant presented a "TIME RECORD SHEET". That time record sheet shows how much time applicant has been credited on his 30 year sentence. The time record sheet is an official document provided to every offender by TDCJ-ID.
Secondly, applicant presented a "Manuel Calculation Time Print-out Form". That form was provided by staff counsel for offenders. It shows each time applicant entered TDCJ-ID, and the date of his release. Also, it was an calculation of the exact amount of time applicant has accumulated on his 30 year sentence pursuant to the 5 times he was in TDCJ-ID.
THE FACTS:
According to these official documents, it is obvious and also undisputed by Mr. Valdez that applicant has earned 24 years, 7 months and 21 days on his 30 year sentence.
*4 THE MISAPPLICATION OF THE FACTS :
The only issue for the trial court was for it to decide where did the 24 years, 7 months and 21 days that applicant has been given credit for some from Mr. Valdez simply typed up a chart by using all of applicant's arrest dates and release dates and stated that applicant had received credits for those dates. However, applicant viggorously alleges that for Mr. Valdez to claim such is absolutely absurb, because the actual official Time Sheet Records from TDCJ-ID clearly shows that applicant has been incarcerated 5 different times on his 30 year sentence and pursuant to those 5 incarcerations applicant was in prison for 24 years, 7 months and 21 days. The trial court misapplied the facts by not doing it's own calculation of applicant's time from his 5 incarcerations, instead it relied on a erroneous and untruthful affadavit of Mr. Valdez.
BASIC MATHEMATICS :
Because applicant's 5 prison incarcerations equals 24 years, 7 months, and 21 days, and according to Mr. Valdez himself, the records shows that applicant has been credited with 24 years, 7 months and 21 days, for Mr. Valdez to state the claim that TDCJ had given applicant the 20 months flat time credits that he claims he has been denied is far fetched.
A SIMPLE HABEAS CORPUS ISSUE :
The issue is very simple, first determine how much time applicant spent in prison on his sentence the 5 incarcerations and then review TDCJ-ID's records to find out how much time applicant has been credited. If applicant has spent 24 years, 7 months, and 21 days in prison, then there is no way TDCJ has credited him with the 20 months pre-revocation parole credits.
*5
THE EXHIBITS :
Attached to this objection applicant is presenting the (A) TIME RECORD SHEET FROM TDCJ-ID (B) AND THE MANUAL TIME CACULATION FORM SHEET.
PURPOSE OF THE EXHIBITS : These exhibits will allow the Court of Criminal Appeals to sea that applicant has only been given credit for 24 years 7 months and 21 days, also, a review of the findings and conclusions by the trial court will reveal that Mr. Valdez agrees to the figuration of the amount of time applicant has been credited for. The ManualTime Caculation Form will show how much time applicant earned "IN PRISON" on his sentence. Without doubt the fact will show that applicant has not been credited with any time except what he earned in prison.
WHEREFORE, Applicant Pray that this Court of Criminal Appeals would reject the findings and conclusions of the trial court and issue an order that TDCJ-ID immediately award the 20 months of flat time credits to the completion of applicant's sentence, and that if so ordered, applicant would be released to mandatory supervision parole pursuant to lav
NOTARY I, STEVEN D. SILBERT TdCj-Id No. 423645, do hereby declare under the penalty of perjury that the above is true and that I signed the sane on this 1st day of Ftbuasin , 2015.
*6 PAROLE DATA: SUBMITTED FOR BOARD REVIEW (Fart Supported by the evidence presented) Applicant's Flat Time Credits that Td e s has given him on his 30 year Sentence are ., and 2 Days As of May 2,2014. A calculation of the Time Applicant Spent Incarcerated in Td e s -Id Missns the Five dipperent times He was Sent to Tde s prives that he has not been given as Flat Time Credits for the 21 months worth of time He was Incarcerated on behalf of the numerous parole warrants.
*7