Case Information
*1
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
OFFICE OF THE CLERK WASHINGTON, D.C. 20543-0001 July 15,2015 José Alvarado # 1565198 Ramsey One Unit 1100 FM 655 Rd. Rosvacion, TX. 77583
RE: Al varado v. Texas TXCRA No.WR-73 133-03 Dear Mr. Alvarado: The above-entitled petition forwrit of cettiorari was originally postmarked January 16.2015 and received again on July 14, 2015. The papers are returned for the following reasons):
The petition fails to comply with the content requirements of Rule 14 , in that the petition does not contain: The jurisdictional statement must clearly state the lower court decisions that the petition is seeking review of Rule 14.1(e). Please correct and resubmit as soon as possible, Unless the petition is submitted to this office in corrected form within 60 days of the date of this letter, the petition will not be filed. Rule 14.5 A copy of the corrected petition must be saved on opposing causes. When making the required corrections to a petition, no change to the substance of the Petition may be made.
Sincerely, Scott S. Harris, Clerk By: - His signature Jacob C. Travers (202)
Enclosures
*2 From: Joss Aluasado, Retitioner Prose. TDCJ# 1565199 Ramsey One Unit . Rosbaron, TX. 77583 Joly To: The Office Of The Clerk Of The United States Supreme Court Washingto H, D.C. 20543-0001 RE: Alvavado v. Texas Tr. Ct. No. 2008-CRS-584-D4 TXCRA No. WR-73, 133-03, AND, 04.
Dear Mr. Jacob C. Travers, Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court, thank you for your letter, In response to your letter requesting to correct the petitions' Jurisdictional Statement, you? 2 on the petition, stating the lower court's decisions in that the PETITION is seeking review of: RULE H. 1 (s) of Supreme Court. And dates? Reviewed 'Has been corrected, and one copy was served on the opposing counsel.' No change of the substance was made, exactly as requeste'din your letter. Now, I hope everything is right, so my claims as remedy to correct my state and Federal rights can be taken in consideration and be able to receive a full and fair litigation as it was in treepreled by the Fifth Circuit Court because of , District Court's unfair and wrongful conviction,
For your time, Thank you very much, sincerely: Qase Ad Corrected and: Qase Aluasado Retitioner Prose TDCJ# 1565199 Erecuted and placed in us, Moil bar on this the 28th, by of July 2015.
*3
JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT. Exposte Alianado Na.WR-73,133-03, and 09 RULE 14.1 (E): (i) D]The date of the orderfor fulland fair litigation sought to be reviewed was entered AUGUST 18, 2014. THE PETITION, INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE AS IF FULLY PRINTED HERE, IS FILED UNDER THIS COURT'S RULE II. On May 14, 2007, Retitimer Aluasado was unlawfully arrested in retaliation, On September 10, 2008, Untimely indicted, And on January 28, 2009, In a bench trial, the trial court abused its discretion, use [2] perjured testimony and convicted him of indecency with a child by contact F2, and sentence him to 11 years in prison. In a plea of not guilty, the 406 th, Courts' erroneous decision, destroyed Petittoners' innocence. Rule II applies. (ii) D] There were, no orders respecting rehearing/hor orders granting an extention of time to file this petition for a unit of certiorari. (iii) D] Retitimer is proceeding in forma pauperis and not presented by counsel? Rule 12.2 applies. (iv) E] The statutory provision believed to confer on this Court's jurisdiction is, Rule 10 (a) a United States court of appeals...s. sanctioned a departure by a lower court from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, as to call for an exercise of this Court's supervisory power, to wit,..enforcing its-... order for full and fair litigation? e.g., APRA. If it is ORDERE , it is an ORDERE for full and fair litigation. e.g., APRA, R.B., On November 19, 2014, The Court of Criminal Appeals ignored that order , And again on June 10, 2015 e.g., APRC, And F, State. Courts' erroneous decision denying review, resulted in a fundamental miscarriage of justice. e.g., APRC, stated, APRA.