Case Information

*1 Gerald Happe us. STARe of Texas PD-1547-14 $01-09-00437-CR$ $\pm 1$ M8373- $+c$ .

RECEIVED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS APR 092015 Coart of Cmininal Appeals Adel Acosta, Clerk

FILED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS APR 092015 Abel Acosta, Clerk

Covert clerk 3

I Am currently filing a PDR on April 102015, addressing issues pertaining to the Auke's Brief filed by Coursal, Franklin Bynum, Appinital After prose Coursel remover by coA. These issues And claims of issue of discretion by coA And ineffective Representation were previously motioned before tave cover. (See Docket) Exclosed is one of many Correspondences directed at Coursel whom clearly Abunded appellant before Reviem of the record And was guilty of legal shemangans that regutted in a Plamed Andor's briefing. If has vidated the due process, Rights of the Appetant And apporturties to property litigate parts of errors within the record. Prior to filing of PDR, I motion to have this document and Numberas otass included for Reviem And consideration, either as exbibits or radical notice.

Respectfully 6 Hager $4-8-2015$

*2 Fenuklin Synum:

Dear Sir: It is apparent from your blank disregard for the TRep and my head to preserve all points of errors that firmly exist in the trial could record, that your intention is one of ineffectiveness and conflict of interest. As requested, in your previous letter, I have filed a grievence with the stateman and Refuse to Adhere to your suggestion had legal pressure to waive my rights to Adired Appeal per your nation. Since a grievence was seen filed, case Iain states a conflict of interest, requiring your removal or hearing for determination.

If you proceed with the brief, although I object to any filmy by your office, since the record is clearly incomplete and missing, I suggest you contact. Then I s sell, standing counsel for of raienter foe truth. A cover up point that requested in decided of such conduct as:

One the COA has birked outly, any, orise notions and comparative I am requesting, and demanding, the following:

1. Prose direct appeal, brief, previously "sfrust," by COA, be admitted and refuted for review.
2. Motion filed before COA, requesting (s) 3 days after filmy of your brief to permit, appellant, prose 2, (plement to s) 3 rief.
3. Abatement of appeal with Federal Unit and motion for discretionary review before (point of c) arim 250, is "ruled out." (Issues of prose removal)
4. Permit I Appellant, Hayes, previous counsel, to review appellate s) 5 ff prior to filmy, securing that all requested and needed points of errors are included and complete for appellate review. Appellant does not waive any points of errors but includes by counsel but exist in record, based on his, Synum, defense.

*3 Strugatgy that Appers to be chefclent and is undermining the proptef functioning of the Adversarial process. Bymmin's strategy was to consult with the Appliant And "leave out" certain points of error, which include precsting with an incomplete/missing trial record curtes am inherent risk of prejudice. 5. Counted to address for Appellate Review the COA decision that resulted in a decision/order that was contrary to And involved an unfesswable application of clearly established Federal Law And decision was based on an unfocsswable determination of fuct in light of the evidence presented. 6. Both the Trial court, Gurt Repertor, District Attuney And Court of Appor care in violation of Brady v. Munyland whitholding Record had now discovered evidence, equally trusting is Hagers Reperted presentation of extubts and documents/record that support there claims. 7. Appliant direct appor biieff weant to include the following: A) extraveaus of Pence (other pending dubbies) Admitted by state Hofts; Record contains 10 timely fited Notice B) INsuff. of evidence - Jackson v. V.e. - All ossentical eloments of ofence ebtery - Bellet yow? Never any testinmy of pellet yow used lessor included ofence - pellet yow vs. DW K. rearm 2 prong L. D. Not met. Asuse of discretion. C) Sentencing error - enhancement - (Insuffaved) (2-20) per packet D) Incomplete/missing record - needed to show violation of comfort- ation right to witnesses - Defends in chief recalling e) COA dewar of Appellantis due process, equal protection right, to self-Rep on Appellate bricf. F) Newly discovered evidence - withheld by D. A. (Pictures)

I shall bhad received via mail or fax - in your possession c) Considering the bave a refusal to answer Please Provide me with copos of motion for supporting Repute and resimiting of prove bricf. Amp.

Repectilly.

$$1-11-13$$

*4

Public

Defender ${}^{\text{ts}}$
office

Harris County, Texas

Franklin G. Bynum Assistant Public Defender franklin.bynum@pdo.hctx.net

Harris County Public Defender

1201 Franklin Street 13th Floor Houston, Texas 77002

Main Number

(713) 368-0016

Facsimile (e-mail preferred) (713) 437-4334

December 26, 2012 Gerald Allen Hayes TDCJ No. 01578806 Ellis Unit 1697 Farm to Market Road 980 Huntsville, Texas 77343 Dear Mr. Hayes: I am enclosing every piece of paper you have ever sent me. I will retain the record on appeal, on loan from the clerk's office, in my office until I complete the brief in this case.

The due date for the appellant's brief in this case is now January 3, 2013. I will be seeking additional time to complete the brief due to the length of the record and the time it takes to respond to your numerous requests.

You are smart enough to realize that direct appeal is not the correct vehicle to raise the issues that you wish to raise. The nature of direct appeal is a very limited, technical review of the record. You did include some additional evidence at the motion for new trial, but again I am limited to what was admitted at the hearing.

You will not be able to proceed with your postconviction writ until the direct appeal concludes. Your direct appeal will conclude when the mandate issues or when the appeal is dismissed by you.

You requested a "hearing to possibly remove [sic.] withdraw my right to appeal." You do not need a hearing to accomplish this; I have attached a form motion to dismiss your appeal. Once you file it, though, you will not be able $\mathit{\mu }$ pursue your direct appeal again. However, you will be able to proceed with your claims outside the record via a postconviction writ.

Since you have repeatedly told me that you believe my brief representation has been deficient already, I have enclosed a blank grievance form for your convenience.