Case Information

*1

*2

DOCS NOT MIND EDD NOT COMING WITH IC. C. E. HAT. 1.23. 45.019 (a) (D). RES- RESIDES, IS REPAIRED, BY H PRODON- DORANCE OF THE EVERENCE, EXHIBIT AL-AS. THAT THE CONSIDTATION REGUCIES, 45.019(a)(2) (D). 80 MUST HARDY, SEC. SHIRE OF TEXHY KENY HY. E. 4 (A4). HYALHED. E THE TEXHY COURT OF CRIMINAL HEROAL HY. SHIRED THE THE SHEE ENCY OF H. COM- PIENT (45.018(a), 45.019(a) (D) ENL. IS H. GUESION OF LALY, SEC. 2018.211 I20. (D) ENS. SHIRE V. MOE F. HY. GOL. SEC. EXHAS, [E2] SHIRE, KENY THAT H. HERDOND CHALLENGE SHOULD YEC. KAISSE. ON DIDENT (0111:00822CE FSSUC. 3) HARDY. OK IN EIEST (10CRIA) 83.31 HART. 11.01.192 THE PART. U. O. COURT JUAGE EVER YEEREY LOTH THE SHIRE IN HIS FINGING OF FACES. MID CONCLUSIOUS OF LALY, EXH.A. 1 (10C8). THIS MENLY DISCOVERED OR OWTHING ECE- ENCE, EXHARDEN, LOTLINAIDS, 40.181-1912. CLINELY RENUT THE HOUSTON HARDY COURT HYD THES COURT, RUDIASS ON BLL. HAT. 1.23. BLL. SHIRE, 10CRIA (1) 83.3 (1) (D) (E) (D) (D) (D) 10CRIA. 1183-4.10CRIA 83.3 (1) (D) (E) (D) 10CRIA.

*3 DEMING OR NOT PROGRESSING THE MEKETS OF ISSUE NIL'S ON EDUCCT IMPROFU AND DU LOCKIAIT-83-3/10CKIAIT-83-4/10CK- 1911-837.1118.11.01.

SEE, SHIRE, OU AUKENEHTE ITO SUGAR 676 (084 [13] (TEX, EAF, HUSTIN, 2005) SENDOR, KETTERCO JUUGEE HON. JOHN E. ONION, SIT TING HAY PARADIATMENT, CITTAS, HAT. 45017 HELP THAT THE STATE IS PENKEDN WITM, HAT. 45019 (RECIGATEIFES), UNITIY H. LES ISLHTDVE REVISION OCCURS. THES REVISION OCCURED HUKE TO THIS LITIGATION SHOCE 2010-2015, HAY THE, MIMENOMEM OF THIS (45019) SECTION HAY HOUSE PALL (H. 8, 1380) 13818 (SEPT. 1, 2015). SEE, KINGY, SHIRE, 9973 (1921) ISG (TEX, HAY. HOUSTON, LY GIST, 1990) ENS, H. BFFCCDVE, 45. (1921) 45019 (HES) (4) (19) COMPUTER HOST NUT COUPER JURISFICH TO H. MILIEDAN OR JUSTICE OF THE POWCE COMPET ( 1922, M00DYME, J. F. N. I. GANVESTON, NY, 71530). SEE THIS COURT, PRECIOENT, HAY V. SHIRE, 65 3U 2d (064, 664, 668 (TEX, CKIAM, HAY 2001), SEE, PRECIOUM COUPERCNS TANCY, COKOH 2001. EN3, OU U 00822,08 (10CKIAIT) MPAAR. ISSUE NILY EXPRESS COUPER, 8893 UADd 130-131 (TEX,CKIAM, HAY 1979).

*4 SW3d (TEX, S.C. 2012) (N0.09 40745/6224 (PBCCURT UM), HELP JURZTZM (TIE, 2004) WECESSHKY TO DETERMINE WHTHEK; JURGE'S (COURT) ORIGERS) DU THE CASE WAS VODO WHECH WOULD PBCCUUCE, MAZLLATE JURZSKEOTZON, EMA

SEE, DMLLAS CO. HAPERATSMUY, EHWES KEC OVERY, 881 SW3d 405,468 (TEX, MPK, 1994), AS. HN MAZLLUTE COURT WE HRE, POUMO WY CTEXAS (U.S. COURT) SUPREME COURT HUHOMETY THAT HAS KOT SEEN OVER-

RELUDO (MARCO, FUMERST, 195 SW3d 100, 103 (TEX, S.C. 1990) CATEO DU HARRESON Y TOD Td. 134 SW3d 490,492,493 (TEX, MPK, WMO, 2004) SEE, MURCD, 468, SHYTED DF (CURVETON CO. SOHH KEST, COURT OR J. K. KOI, GAN, CO. TEXAS) THE TREMAL COURT LACKED JURZSKEOTZON, THEN THE MAZLLLATE COURT, ONLY HAS JUR ZSKEOTZON TO SET (IOCKPAIT) HSDCE WHO CTSMESS THE CAHSC.

THE PETITOUGH UAS KOT CHARGED EY DURZUMENT AS (VODO) LOCKPAIT 8-5-2011 JURZMANT, SHYTES. (SEE, EXH.AG (4)). FUOROUE, WAS CHARGED / HARRESTED UDA BUL TURY WAY OTHY OSSOOR MAZUT CHUR ON IT? OUW MRLUED THE 1-4-2011 SEARCH WHEWING MND NOT ESME 3. CHARGING / MAREST DU SHAMMALCH YAOOYALSO

*5 G. 40 . (MRT.45.01806. 45.019) 300 -139800 MFFT2MUT AND COMKMMUTFOK ARKEST, GUAKKMUT APKDL 21 - 23 - 200. \% SEC, SMME, HARMENDEZ, 842 SUJad 306, 311 (TEX, 1144 SHMANTOMO L992), IN TEX 145 A CRIMIDIAL RROSECUITOU TS CONSTERE- ED IN PROGRESS AFTER THE ACOUSED HAS DEEN FORMALLY ARKESTED HNO TAKEN DEFORK A MIAST JERME OR UHAN HE IS DINCCTED OR CUAKEED (GK2 2010-13980) AV CUMKMMUT (45.01801/45.019) UHNH 14 CRIMINAL OFFENCE, CITING CMEES: SEC.(MRT. 2.05), KULLEY, SMME, 16 SUJ 339 (1144 L891), UHEN A CUMKMMUT ( 2010 -13980 CHARGES A FELONY (423-2010) IT MIJEES DE FELED GUHHA MAGISTRME, CITING GALCOTEXUS 1922 M0027 HIC 4-23-5010) SEC. EUMARFENESS 446 SUJad 186 (TEX, CRIM, 2014), CITING NIX, 664,668, SUJERA, CONST- ITUTONAL KELHTS CUN DE FORFEDTED ON HANSAS COKANS DUE TO LACK OF MCTION, EUT A LACK OF SURFECTMUTER JURESSECTION CAMN D. SEC. FIDERS, SMME, 2013 TEX, 1144. LEES 11426 (TEX, 1144 HOUSTON 1ST, 1213-2013) SEVEMENT 5.2013, UITED JURGGMENT, KIS- 313-183, CINT, COK 211016, MUST-CKENTE A KELHTOR RECEPENT

*6

*7

STATE'S RESPONSE TO PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

THE STATE OF TEXAS, opposes Petitioner's Writ of Habeas Corpus.

I. HISTORY OF THE CASE

The applicant, "Bryan Williams, is confined in TDCJ-ID because of his conviction and sentence in Gregg County cause number 40,789-B. Williams was charged with the felony offense of possession of a controlled substance (Count I) and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon (Count II). (Appendix A: Indictment). After being admonished that he could face consecutive sentences if he. went to trial on both counts separately, he elected severance of the two counts and jury trials on both. 3 RR 5-7. The jury found him guilty of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced him to 75 years. (Application, Appendix G: JudgmentCount I). After a jury was seated and testimony had begun on Count II, he pleaded guilty and was sentenced by the judge to 5 years, to run consecutively to the 75 -year

*8 sentence. (Application Appendix H: Judgment—Count II). was sentenced by the judge to five years in prison to run consecutively to the 75-year sentence. Id. He is confined at the Allred Unit as TDCJ inmate number 1784621.

II. APPLICANT'S ALLEGATIONS

Williams claims that the municipal court judge and trial court judge lacked jurisdiction, both personal and subject-matter jurisdiction over him due to a void search warrant affidavit.

III. NECESSITY FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING AND EXPANSION OF THE RECORD.

The record needs no expansion. Williams need not be returned to Gregg County for a hearing.

IV. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES

1) This is a subsequent writ application, not subject to any exception.

This is a subsequent request for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. While there are exceptions for subsequent writs applications, applicant has failed to alleged that his request falls within one of those exceptions. He alleges that his claims of subject-

*9

T.K.E. 301

matter jurisdiction can never be waived, and that he only recently obtained a copy of the "defective void Exh. A 1 from my family member." The record and facts were complete when Applicant filed his first application for writ of habeas corpus. Application Exhibit A 1 is the affidavit for search warrant signed by Kilgore Police Department officer Brady L. Middlebrooks and used to obtain a search warrant for the blue 1994 Cadillac in which Williams had been seen sitting. The search warrant affidavit was not offered into evidence at Williams' trial. No issue was made of the search warrant affidavit's validity at the hearing on motion to suppress. See Appendix A, Reporter's Record from hearing.

If there had been a problem with the search warrant affidavit, the issue could have been raised in a motion to suppress or to nndirettappas leasinabie firsthabeas applications Pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 11.07, §4, applicant's writ should be dismissed. 2) Williams states he has a petition or appeal pending in the Eastern District of Beaumont, under Cause Number 06:15CV0005.

Cause number 06:15CV0005 in the Beaumont Federal Court is related to Cause number 40,789-B, the conviction under scrutiny here. As a matter of fact, the magistrate's report states that Williams used the same memorandum of law for his federal habeas that he used in his first state habeas application. See Appendix B, Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate's

*10 report was signed on July 9, 2015, and explains that Williams has 14 days to respond to it, so as of the date of this response, it is technically still pending although a ruling has been made to deny relief requested as well as to deny a certificate of appealability.

3) The claim of lack of jurisdiction lacks merit.

If his claim is considered on the merits, it should be denied for the following reasons. Williams claims that Exhibit A1 is the affidavit used to secure a search warrant for a car in which Williams consistently denied any interest. The affidavit was not, therefore, made a part of the record of this case because the search was never an issue.

Mr. Williams complains that the affidavit is void for non-compliance with

Application Memorandum at 2.

The two statutes Williams alleges were not followed do not refer to search warrant affidavits. They refer to charging instruments for misdemeanor offenses called complaints. Williams' Exhibits A (1) and A (2) are, collectively, the affidavit sworn to by Officer Middlebrooks in order to get the warrant to search the abandoned car which Williams claimed was not his.

*11

T.ke, $ϵ$ aol

Williams's sole ground for relief is frivolous and meritless and should be denied.

V. CONCLUSION

The State prays this Court recommend that the application be denied.

Respectfully submitted, CARL L. DORROUGH Criminal District Attorney Gregg County, Texas By: Ean Eeson 2 son Zan Eolson Brown Assistant District Attorney State Bar No. 03205900

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing "State's Response to Applicant's Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus" was given to the District Clerk of Gregg County, Texas, on July 20, 2015, to be mailed to Applicant, Bryan Williams, 1784621, Allred Unit, 2101 FM 369 N, Iowa Park, TX 76367.

*12

T.K.E. 201

NO. 40,789-B-H-2

EX PARTE

BRYAN WILLIAMS

$\S$ IN THE 124TH DISTRICT COURT

$\S$ $\S$ $\S$ $\S$ $\S$

GREGG COUNTY, TEXAS

GREGG COUNTY, TEXAS

FINAL ORDER AND FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

JUL 282015

Having considered the Applicant's Application for Post-Conviction Writ of Habeas Corpus, the State's Answer, along with reviewing the record in the case, and the materials submitted, the Court recommends that the application be DISMISSED as a subsequent writ, or, if considered on its merits, DENIED.

The Court specifically finds as follows:

1) The police saw Williams exiting a car and later found the car to be locked. 2) Williams denied that the car was his. 3) The police, after determining that no one else at the location claimed to own the car, had the car towed, obtained a search warrant and searched the car, finding controlled substance, and several of Williams' personal items connecting Williams to the car and its contents. 4) Williams was than indicted and his arrest was pursuant to a warrant following a grand jury indictment.

*13

T.K.E. 20

5) Williams' attorney filed a motion to suppress, claiming that his warrantless arrest was without probable cause, but not making any claim about the search of the car. 6) Williams' motion to suppress any statements made after a warrantless arrest was denied because it was not a warrantless arrest. (10) Williams could have raised any issue regarding the search warrant affidavit could have been raised at the motion to suppress, on direct appeal, as in his first application for writ of habeas corpus. (2) Fetar Code of Criminal Procedure until the 1890s and 1980s require the use of the communication and the use of the communication.

The Court makes the following conclusions of law:

1) This is a subsequent writ, not subject to any exception. 2) Williams has a federal habeas pending on this conviction. 3) Williams waived his right to complain about the search warrant affidavit by denying any interest in the car. 4) The complaint that the search warrant affidavit lacked language required of misdemeanor complaints lacks merit and is frivolous.

The clerk of the Court is directed to prepare a transcript to include the applicant's Application for Post-Conviction Writ of Habeas Corpus, the State's Answer, with appendices, a copy of the indictment, the judgment for Count I, and a

*14

TIKKE. 301

copy of these findings and send it to the Court of Criminal Appeals in Austin, Texas. The clerk is further directed to forward a copy of these findings to the applicant.

SIGNED on $$ JUL 272015

*15 This Holomb Refutes The Devants Or My Chmnis On The Vow/ Abbreicmest (Smme) CPD RHKKST/ CHHKSDS DOcUMENTS. If My Senecur HFFDOND (asso Oxy OBPHNES ON 1-4-901) HHS files DY JH CAMES IF SEL! HHS TO CAMPely WOM 43.019 Kegui sites DY' anly TUS SEORDNS DUE.C.K. TO OBSMME SERMON/ HHKKST WHEKKANT/ RHSsS ON SWOWN HFFDDOND (S) IS.09-1505/45.018-45.019 hB DF/ OK KWUS.