Case Information

*1

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

The petitioner asks leave to file the attached petition for a writ of certiorari without prepayment of costs and to proceed in forma pauperis.

Please check the appropriate boxes: $◻$ Petitioner has previously been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in the following court(s): Cours of Criminal Appetts of Texas, U.S. b. St. Court, Northern D. St. Dalh. St., 5th, Circuit Cours of Appetis $◻$ Petitioner has not previously been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in any other court.

P Petitioner's affidavit or declaration in support of this motion is attached hereto. $◻$ Petitioner's affidavit or declaration is not attached because the court below appointed counsel in the current proceeding, and: $◻$ The appointment was made under the following provision of law: $$ $$ or $◻$ a copy of the order of appointment is appended.

*2 AFFIDAVIT OR DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

I, Thomas Kay Sides, am the petitioner in the above-entitled case. In support of my motion to proceed in forma pauperis, I state that because of my poverty I am unable to pay the costs of this case or to give security therefor; and I believe I am entitled to redress.

1. For both you and your spouse estimate the average amount of money received from each of the following sources during the past 12 months. Adjust any amount that was received weekly, biweekly, quarterly, semiannually, or annually to show the monthly rate. Use gross amounts, that is, amounts before any deductions for taxes or otherwise.

| Income source | Average monthly amount during the past 12 months | Amount expected next month | |---------------|--------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------| | | You | Spouse | You | Spouse | | Employment | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Self-employment | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Income from real property (such as rental income) | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Interest and dividends | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Gifts | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Alimony | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Child Support | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Retirement (such as social security, pensions, annuities, insurance) | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Disability (such as social security, insurance payments) | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Unemployment payments | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Public-assistance (such as welfare) | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Other (specify): | $0|$ | $0|$ | | Total monthly income: | $0|$ | $0|$ |

*3

1. List your employment history for the past two years, most recent first. (Gross monthly pay is before taxes or other deductions.)

| Employer | Address | Dates of
Employment
4/1/09 - ? | | | | | Gross monthly pay | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | | Tevas | | | | | | $$ & 0 \ \hline 3. & & & & & & & & & & & } & & & & 4 \ \hline 3. & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & 4 \ \hline 3. & & & & & & & & & & & & & & 4 \ \hline 3. List your spouse's employment history for the past two years, most recent employer first. (Gross monthly pay is before taxes or other deductions.) | | | | | | | | | Address | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

*4

1. State every person, business, or organization owing you or your spouse money, and the amount owed.

Person owing you or your spouse money

1. State the persons who rely on you or your spouse for support.

| Name | Relationship | Age | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | NA | NA | NA |

1. Estimate the average monthly expenses of you and your family. Show separately the amounts paid by your spouse. Adjust any payments that are made weekly, biweekly, quarterly, or annually to show the monthly rate.

| | You | Your spouse | | :--: | :--: | :--: | | Rent or home-mortgage payment (include lot rented for mobile home) | | | | Are real estate taxes included? $◻$ Yes $◻$ No Is property insurance included? $◻$ Yes $◻$ No | | | | Utilities (electricity, heating fuel, water, sewer, and telephone) | | | | Home maintenance (repairs and upkeep) | | | | Food | | | | Clothing | | | | Laundry and dry-cleaning | | | | Medical and dental expenses | | |

*5

*6

1. Do you expect any major changes to your monthly income or expenses or in your assets or liabilities during the next 12 months?

Yes No If yes, describe on an attached sheet. 10. Have you paid - or will you be paying - an attorney any money for services in connection with this case, including the completion of this form? Yes No

If yes, how much? $$ If yes, state the attorney's name, address, and telephone number: 11. Have you paid-or will you be paying-anyone other than an attorney (such as a paralegal or a typist) any money for services in connection with this case, including the completion of this form?

Yes No If yes, how much? $$ If yes, state the person's name, address, and telephone number: 12. Provide any other information that will help explain why you cannot pay the costs of this case. Indigent, Handicapped + denied S.S.I. Disability Due to incarciration, No family or spent

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on: $$ , 20 $$

*7 No.

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Thomas Kay Sides — PETITIONER (Your Name)

vs.

The State of Texas Court of Criminal Appeals — RESPONDENT(S) ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas (NAME OF COURT THAT LAST RULED ON MERITS OF YOUR CASE)

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Thomas Kay Sides #131382 (Your Name)

2664 F.M. 2034 (Address)

Tennessee Colony, Texas. 75886 (City, State, Zip Code)

(Phone Number)

*8

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED

If the state Couts illegal action in violation of the u.s. constitution creates an impediment to a petitioner proceeding to federal court and filing his/her application for writ of Habers Capus tussuant to 22 U.S.C. $\$2254$ , and thru due diligence the petitioner has been unsuccessful in getting the offending state court to correct the error which is the cause of the impediment. 1 Can the petitioners one year statute of linitalions begin to run, with permission from the federal Cours, and he/she be allowed to file their application for writ of habeas corpus. Thus restoring their right to due process, or ^[2] Can the petitioner's one year statute of limitations be waived with a showing of due diligence, a showing that the offending state court refuses to correct the error, and a showing that the error is a constitutional violation, allowing petitioners to proceed to Federal Court and file his/her application for writ of habers Corpus. Thus Restoring their right to due process. "Please take note that the Constitutional error in question is Jurisdictional in nature, and clearly noted in the record."

*9

LIST OF PARTIES

$[X]$ All parties appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. [ ] All parties do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. A list of all parties to the proceeding in the court whose judgment is the subject of this petition is as follows:

Petitioner: Thomas Roy sides #3313182. Michael unit 2664 Fim. 2054 Tennessee Colony, TX. 75886

Respondant: the State of Texas Court of Criminal Appeals P.O.Bax. 12308 Capital Station

Austin, Texas. 78711

*10

TABLE OF CONTENTS

OPINIONS BELOW ..... 1 JURISDICTION ..... 2 CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED ..... 930 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ..... $4\mathrm{F}-10$ REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT ..... $4+2$ CONCLUSION ..... 13 INDEX TO APPENDICES APPENDIX A Lisc of Cases and Courts who ruled upon them. APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F

*11 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CITED

CASES Hares V1. U.S.; 339 F.ed. 30; Certioari Denied; 85 S.Ct.926; 380 U.S.924; 13 L.Ed.ed. 809.

Arthur V. Allen; 452 F.ed. 1234 (2006) James V. Cain; 50 F.ed. 1372 (5th.Cit. 1995) Blivens V. 6 unknown Fed. Mars.; 403 U.S. 388; 91 S.Ct. 1999; 24 L.Ed. 2d. 619 N.A.A.C.P. v. city of Kyle N.; 626 F.ed. 233 (5th.Cit. 200)

STATUTES AND RULES 28 U.S.C. $2244 (d)(126) Fed. Civil Proc. 103.2 Fed. Civil Proc. 12 (b)(3) U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 3 & 2 26 U.S.C. $1291-1295 U.S.C.A.m. Const.Amend. 5-44

OTHER Texas Code of Criminal Procedures 11.07 (9)(9)

*12 Table of Authorities cited contained

Cases Age Number

Lewis v. Casey; 518 u.s. 343 j349 81; 116 s.c.t. 2174; "3"

135 L.Ed. 2d. 606 (1996)

Eggl. v. Fleeisgard, Inc.; 1998 N.D. 166; 583 N.w. 2d. 812 "3A"

Madero Development; 803 s.w. 2d 396 "3A"

see Also see Also city at Kounize (1976) ; 818 F.2d. 355; 543 s.w.2d 871 79 L.Ed. 338

*13

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Petitioner respectfully prays that a writ of certiorari issue to review the judgment below.

OPINIONS BELOW

[ ] For cases from federal courts:

The opinion of the United States court of appeals appears at Appendix $$ to the petition and is [ ] reported at $$ ; or, [ ] has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or, [ ] is unpublished. The opinion of the United States district court appears at Appendix $$ to the petition and is [ ] reported at $$ ; or, [ ] has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or, [ ] is unpublished. [X] For cases from state courts: Judigent Texas offender; Ms Copies to send please Refer to Appendix "A" to the petition and is [ ] reported at $$ ; or, [ ] has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or, [ ] is unpublished. The opinion of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals $$ court appears at Appendix "A" to the petition and is [ ] reported at $$ ; or, [ ] has been designated for publication but is not yet reported; or, $[X]$ is unpublished.

*14

JURISDICTION

[ ] For cases from federal courts:

The date on which the United States Court of Appeals decided my case was $$ . [ ] No petition for rehearing was timely filed in my case. [ ] A timely petition for rehearing was denied by the United States Court of Appeals on the following date: $$ , and a copy of the order denying rehearing appears at Appendix $$ . [ ] An extension of time to file the petition for a writ of certiorari was granted to and including $$ (date) on $$ (date) in Application No. $$ A $$ .

The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 28 U. S. C. § 1254(1). [X For cases from state courts:

$$\text{Last Court Action in Care}$$

The date on which the highest state court decided my case was 5-20-15 A copy of that decision appears at Appendix $$ No Copy to send, [ ] A timely petition for rehearing was thereafter denied on the following date: $$ , and a copy of the order denying rehearing appears at Appendix $$ . [ ] An extension of time to file the petition for a writ of certiorari was granted to and including $$ (date) on $$ (date) in Application No. $$ A $$ .

The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked under 28 U. S. C. § 1257(a).

*15

CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED

"Any action taken without Jurisdiction is void": NA.A.C.P. V. City of Kyle, N. ; 626 F3d. 233 (5th. Cir. 2010)

Fed. Rules of Civ. Proc. 12 (b)(3) U.S.C.A. Const. Act. 3 &; 2 "Judicial issues are not subject to warer." Lewis V. Casey; 518 U.S. 343, 349 M; 116 S.C. 2174 ; 135 L.Ed.2d. 666 (1996) Fed. Rules of Civ. Proc. 103,2 "All Citizens have a right to due process + Appeal."(furnphrased) U.S.C.A. Const. Amod. $5+14$ . "A application for writ of habeas Corpus filed by a person in custody subject to state court Judgement, is due to be filed within one year, in part, from the latest of, (A) the date on which the Judgement became final by conclusion of direct review or the axperation of the time for seeking such review; (B) the date on which the "Empediment" to filing an application created by state in violation of theconstitution or laws of the united states is removed, if applicant was prevented from filing by such Actinn." 28 U.S.C. 5 &; 2244 (d)(1) "If (a) petitioner was prevented from filing his habeas corpus petition as a result of "illegal state action", the limitations period will not begin to run until the state impediment is removed." Ausher V. Allen; 452 F.3d. 1234 (2006) James V. Cain; 50 F.3d. 1372 (5th. Cir. 1995) "Lack of Jurisdiction over a case renders a judgment void, and it may always be collaterally attacked." Hanes V. U.S.; 334 F.3d. 30 ; Certiafati Denied; 85 S.C. $926;380$ U.S. 424 13 L.Ed. 2 d. 809

*16 "There is no time limit for attacking a void Judgement." $E_{\text{99}}$ ) v. Fleaţuard, inci; 1992 A.D. 166; 283 Nw.2d. 912 U.S.C.A. Art. III &; 2. 28 U.S.C.A &; 1291 - 1295 "What of Jurisdiction of subject matter of suit will accest a cause at any stage of the proceedings, and it is not subject to waver." Madero Development; 803 Sw. 2d 396; see Also ; 502 U.S. 1073 ; 112 S.Ct. 970 ; see also U.S.C.A. Art. III &; 2. 28 U.S.C.A. &; 1291 - 1295 "Every federal Appellate Court has a special ablication to 'satisfy itself not only of it's own Jurisdiction, but also that of the lower courts in a cause under review." Mitchell v. Mower; 293 U.S. 237244; 85 S.Ct. 162,165; 79 L.Ed. 388

*17

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Petitioner was convicted of two sepenate fubries in the 203rd. Judicial district court of Dallas County, Texas, FO4-48560 and FO4-98562, Being February trading arrest w/la motor vehicle" and "Assault on a Public servant, respectively. He was estenced to 25 years incarcination in each cause. Appeal was taken to the 5th. Court of Appeals of Texas, in Dallas, and these causes were affirmed on June 6th, 2006. (sides v state: "05-05-01093-CR and 05-05-01098-CR" no petition for discretionaty review. Tr. App. Dallas)

Petitioner filed his first pair of w/it applications on 6-6-05 (Before direct appeal), both were dismissed as premature on 3-21-02(ws, 66-982-01 and wR, 66-982-02) quating Texas Code of Criminal procedures article 11.07 (3)(a).

Petitioner filed his second pair of w/it applications on 4-4-07, wR, 66-982-03 and wR, 66-982-04, these two w/it applications were granted in part on 10.8.07. Petitioner was ordered to be allowed to file an out-of-time petition for discretionary review, his direct appeal was restored to ponderay, and all other subsansive claims still pending its w/it application were dismissed as premature, again quoting Texas Code of Criminal Procedures, article 11.07 (3)(a).

Before the Court of Criminal Appeals ruleings on w/its wR, 66-982-03 and wR, 66-982-04 petitioner attempted (incorrectly) to file an addendum to these w/its, there intended addendum were mailed to the Dallas County

*18 district clerks office on August 24th, 2007. (Via the T.B.C.T.I.D. indigent institutional mail system) The Dallas County Disrtict clerks office held them and only filled them on September 28th, 2007. (Clearly before the ruleings on writ applications WR, $66-982-03$ and WR, $66-982-04$ ) Instead of filing these intended addadums as such the clerks office chose to file them as separate writ applications (WR, $66-982-05$ and WR, $66-982-06$ ) with the court of criminal Appeals on 11-8-07. (clearly after the rulings on writs WR, $66-98203$ and WR, $66-$ 982-04) These intended addendums/writ applications were ruled on and denied without written order on 2-6-08. (Fd. 1553-07 and 1554-08) Atitioner did not receive notice of such until 5-1-08.

Actitioner out of time Atitical for Disertionary resien was timely filed with the sth. Cunt of Appeals on 11-20-07, and the Court of Criminal Appeals on 4-7-08. (PD-1553-07 and PD-1554-07) The Atitions were refined by the Cunt of Criminal Appeals on 6-11-09.

In June, 2008, Atitioner filled his Pro-Se applications for writ of habess Corpus in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division...." Believing all his grounds in writs WR, $66-982-03$ , WR, $66-982-$ 04, WR, $66-982-05$ and WR, $66-982-06$ were exhausted due to the language of the findings of fact and conclusions of law filed by first the DA's office, then by the ${203}^{\text{rd}}$ Judicial District court. These are all the same grounds previously filed, with a few changes.

*19 These Federal writ applications were consolidated in cause of $3.08-CV-1049-O(3.08-CV-1100-0)$ and contained more than 30 grounds for relief. On 7.142008, after determining that it was "apparent petitioner suffers from an undisclosed mental illness and, as such, would benefit from appointment of counsel," the Court granted petitioner's motion to appoint counsel and appointed the Federal public defender's to represent petitioner. (see DKt. 10 ). The Court directed Counsel to file an amended application that contains "All grounds upon which petitioner challenges his state convictions. [which] will supersede the pro-se applications" filed by petitioner. Id. The amended petition, filed 10.8 -08, asserted a single ground for relief." That petitioner received in effective assistance of counsel because his attoncy advised him to reject a plan bargain for a file-your sentence and enter open pleas of guilty in hopes of getting probation."(See DKt. 117)

On September 4th, 2009, the District Court dismissed petitioner's habeas Applications, (without prejudice) finding that the claim he asserted was unexhausted and procedurally bursed. (see, DKt. 21, 24 and 25)

After being warned by his appointed counsel that his applications could possibly be dismissed for lack of state court exhaustion, petitioner returned to state court and filed another pair of writ applic--ations (wk, bb. 982-89 and wk, bb. 982-89) and explained clearly the jurisdictional errors which the Court

*20 of criminal Appeals had made when ruling on writ applications WR, 66-982-05 and WR, 66-982-06; yet the court merely "denied without written order on 2-17-10. Please note that the trial Court did not even file it's "findings of fact and conclusions of law" until 5 days later; on 2-22-10) Petitioner filed a motion for cohering on these two new writ applications on 3-11-10, this was "Refused" on 3-30-10; "Even though he once again explained the Jurisdictional errors that had occured were clearly noted in the record." Petitioner then filed a "Motion to set aside judgment" on: writ applications WR, 66-982-05 and WR, 66-982-06, (again pointing out the errors made by the court of crim. Appeals) this motion was answered with a "No action will be taken." (Petitioner had also filed a motion to withdraw those same writs/addendums - No action) Petitioner filed a "Motion for Rehearing" on writs WR, 66-982-09 and WR, 66-982-10 on 3-11-10; this was answered with a "will not be entertained; an march 30th, 2010. Petitioner filed a letter addressed directly to the Honorable Sharon Keller, Cheif Justice-Court of crim. Appeals, on 7-9-10, explaining the Errors that had occured in writs WR, 66-982-05 and WR, 66-982-06, requesting / demanding his rights to due process and Appeal be restored. To this day he has received no. reply or action on this Request/ demand."

*21 Petitioner then filed a pair of wirt applications in state court with a single ground for relief, being the Jurisdictional Errors that had occured. These wirt applications were dismissed as subsequent even though petitioner once again pointed out to the Court of Crim. Appeals that the errors were plain in the record. (Domisted on 5-1-12) On 5-1-12, petitioner mailed a wirt application to the U.S. District Court, requesting help in correcting these errors, since the Court of Crim. Appeals would not) (3112-CV-1030-B-B8) this wirt application was denied on 5-17-12 (16 days?....) Petitioner filed an application for wirt of Mardoma with the Court of Crim. Appeals on 1-22-13 (on 66982 -13) this application was denied without written order on 220-13. Petitioner filed a "Motion Requesting Judicial notice"on 2-28-13, this motion was sumarilly denied on 3-613, (only 7 days later) Petitioner filed an "application for "wirt of Mandamus" with the U.S. District Court, on 5-6-13. (3:13-CV-17. 73 -m) this wirt application was denied on 8-6-13. After researching extensively and finding no other options available to him (this petitioner is on the 3 strikes list for 1983' in fiema Pauperis) Petitioner filed a civil suit in state Constitutal Court in Tines County, Texas, against Honorable Sharon Keller and Hon. Abel Acosta. (Chief Justice and Clerk, Court of Crim.Ap)

*22 on 4-30-14 (D-1-GN-14-000520). The Judge in this cause did two things that made absolutely no same, "Dismissed is for luck of Jurisdiction and 2 ordered that the petitioner could never refile this suit in any form in any state court."

Petitioner even went as far as to file a "motion for a Nanc-Pro-Time order" with the Court of Criminal Appeals on 5-9-15... This motion was denied on May 20th, 2.015. (18 days).

Please take note that not one time in all this time or with everything the petitioner has attempted has the Court of Criminal Appeals denied that these errors were made or in any way attempted to explain that these errors were not in fact Jurisdictional errors.... They simply sluff off all attempts to the sideline; Probably because the know 1 this petitioner is indeent, 2 this petitioner is not only mentally ill but suffered a major brain injury in January, 1009, and last $75\%$ of his long term memory, and 3 is on the 1925' 3 strikes list. (so filing a civil suit in federal court to refuse his right to due process is impossible without this Honorable u.s. supreme Court making special exceptions for cases which deal exclusively with criminal due process denials)

Thank you for your patience with my hondusiring, spelling and grammar, I'm still relearning.

*23 Lastly, petitioner filed a "nation to Repon" or "Petition to file a subsiguent application for wris of trabias Corpus, pursuant to section 2254 on the basis that the Jurisdictional errors made by the Court of Criminal Appols on wirt numbers wR, 66.982 .05 and wR, 66.982 .06 were ultimately to blame for his not being able to properly file in federal court in the first place and/or for the two new writs (wR, 66.982 .09 and wR, 66.982 .10) being dismissed as subsiguent (when in the fact of lawthey weren't) and preventing his returning to federal court and filing a properly filed wirt application after exhaustion; due to the federal courts "dismissal 44 prejudice.

The actions are still pending in the 5th. Circuit Court of Appents. U.S. Dict. # 3:44-CV-4451 -5th. Cit. # 14-1134b U.S. Dict. # 3:68-CV-1099 -5th. Cit. # 15-10230

Propoetgally thank your thank side

*24 REASONS FOR GRANTING THE PETITION

Petitioners' rights to "Due process" and "Appeal" were "stolen" from him by a serious Jurisdictional error by the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, and since "there is no time limit for attack a void Judgement" (a Jurisdictional Error is void from conception) and a void Judgement is a nullity from the beginning, is attended by none of the consequences of a valid Judgement, and is entitled to "no respect what-to-over" because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights, (to quote the C.C.A. Tex.) the petitioners with Apps. w8,66-982-05 and w8,66-982-06 are nullities .... from conception, yet the Tex. Court of Crim. Appeals refuses to acknowledge or accept its own failings, to the detriment of a petitioner who has shown due diligence, "Cause" and "Aejudice" to this Honorable Supreme Court of these United States of America.

I would point out only one case specifically to the Honorable Justices of their most Honorable United States Supreme Court.

Bexias V. 6 unknown Fed. Marc. Agents; 403 U.S. 388; 91 S.C. 1999; 29 L.Ed. 2d. 619

"Where federally protected rights have been invaded, the courts will be alert to adjust their remedies so as to grant the necessary relief," and, "where legal rights have been invaded, on a federal statute provided for a general right to sue for such violation, Federal courts may use any available remedy to make good the wrong."

*25 'Even though I've forfeited my right to sue in forma pauperis - I still have a right to sue.' $I$ have done all I can thinkof or find todo, be'ng handicapped, indigent and suffering from Bi-polar disorder and soial Anxiety disorder (see Appendix B) All I ask from this most Honorable u.s. supreme Court it that you examine the situation I find myself in, and if the two of the had allows, assist me regaining my rights. were I rich or uber intelligent I dare say none of this would have ever occured........ "But I must ask myself "Iy true Justice only for those who have the intelligence or money to secure it?...... Have I forfeited any rights just because I'm on the 1985? 3 strikes list?....... "I don't beleave the u.s. supreme Cun't will allow myBelf and others in the same (surcy) situation to be robbed by a state Court who simply doesn't want to admit to their mistakes. I suit this what the u.s. supreme court is bound by duty to do?

I leave my fate, freedom and life in you cupoble, Honorable hands...

Respectfully Homo. 1985.

*26

This petitioner's Constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process and Appeal have been invaded by the state of Texas; and the Court of Crim. Appeals of Texas, obviously, has no intention of restoring those rights. (and admitting their error) Thus, it is incumbant upon the Federal Courts and more specificly this Honorable Supreme Court of the United States to restore those rights and guarantee this petitioner's rights to due process and Appeal

CONCLUSION

The petition for a writ of certiorari should be granted.

Respectfully submitted, Thomas J. J.

Date:

*27 203rd. Judicial District Court. Dallas, TX. F.04-48560 - Evading Access Vendor Vehicle.

F04-48562-Assault on a Public Servant.

5th. Court of Appeals of Texas. Dallas, TX. 05-05-01093-CR 05-05-01098-CR

Praxis County Constitutional Court. D-1-GN-14-000520

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. $\star$ writ Applications WR, 66-982-01 WR, 66-982-02 WR, 66-982-03 WR, 66-982-04 WR, 66-982-05 WR, 66-982-06 WR, 66-982-07 WR, 66-982-10 WR, 66-982-13 $\star$ Retitions for Discretionary Reviews ${\rho }_{D-1553-07}$ ${\rho }_{D-1554-07}$

United States District Court. Dallas, TX. 3:08-CV-1099-0 (3:08-CV-1400-0 -consolated with Prevous#) 3:12-CV-1030-8-98 3:13-CV-1273-11 3:14-CV-4451

*28 5th. Circuit Coats of Appents, u.s. Coats. 14-11346 $15-10230$

*29

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Thomas Ray Sides
- PETITIONER
(Your Mame)

VS.

the State of Texas
Court of Criminal Appenls - RESPONDENT(S)

PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Thomas Ray Sides , do swear or declare that on this date, , 20 , as required by Supreme Court Rule 29 I have served the enclosed MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS and PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI on each party to the above proceeding or that party's counsel, and on every other person required to be served, by depositing an envelope containing the above documents in the United States mail properly addressed to each of them and with first-class postage prepaid, or by delivery to a third-party commercial carrier for delivery within 3 calendar days.

The names and addresses of those served are as follows: Court of Criminal Appenls of Texas - A#N = Clerk P.O.Box.12308 Capital Station

Autin, Texas, 78711 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on $$ , 20

*30

• | JBÀ4904 /EU39/HSO5 | TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE | $15:07:00$ | | :-- | :-- | :-- | :-- | | | | HEALTH SUMMARY FOR CLASSIFICATION | $08/07/2014$ |

NAME: SIDES, THOMAS RAY TDCJ#: 01313182 SID#: 03739765 UNIT: E JOB: UNASGN MEDICAL

DOB: $08/24/1967$ WGT: 158 LBS HGT: $6^{\prime }{01}^{\prime \prime }$

P U L H E S $\begin{array}{ccccccc}3\hfill & amp;3\hfill & amp;3\text{C}\hfill & amp;\text{C}\hfill & amp;\text{A}\text{P}\hfill & amp;\text{P}\hfill & amp;\text{P}\hfill \end{array}$

I. FACILITY ASSIGNMENT (CHECK ONE) A. NO RESTRICTION B. BARRIER-FREE FACILITY $\overline{00}$ C. SINGLE LEVEL FACILITY D. SUITABLE FOR TRUSTEE CAMP? X YES__NO II. HOUSING ASSIGNMENT A. BASIC HOUSING (CHECK ONE) X 1. NO RESTRICTION 2. SINGLE CELL ONLY 3. SPECIAL HOUSING (HOUSING WITH LIKE MEDICAL CONDITION 4. CELL BLOCK ONLY $\overline{\text{C.}}$ ROW ASSIGNMENT (CHECK ONE) 5. NO RESTRICTION $\overline{00}$ 2. GROUND FLOOR ONLY B. BUNK ASSIGNMENT (CHECK ONE) 6. NO RESTRICTION $\overline{00}$ 2. LOWEK ONLY 7. EXTENDED MEDICAL HOURS D. WHEELCHAIR USE (CHECK ONE) 8. NO RESTRICTION $\bar{2}$ 2. PHOP ORDERED 9. UTILITY USE III.WORK ASSIGNMENT/RESTRICTIONS (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY) 00 1. MEDICALLY UNASSIGNED 10 1. MEDICALLY UNASSIGNED 11. NO REPETITIVE USE OF HANDS 12. SEDENTARY WORK ONLY 13. SEDENTARY WORK ONLY 14. FOUR HOUR WORK RESTRICTION 15. EXCUSE FROM SCHOOL $\overline{00}$ 7. LIMITED STANDING 00 8. NO WALKING > 200 YARDS 00 9. NO LIFTING > 005 LBS. 10. NO BENDING AT WAIST $\overline{00}$ 11. NO REPETITIVE SQUATTING 00 12. NO CLIMBING 13.LIMITED SITTING $\overline{00}14$ . NO REACHING OVER SHOULDER IV. DISCIPLINARY PROCESS (CHECK ONE) X A. NO RESTRICTIONS B. CONSULT REP OF MENTAL HEALTH DEPT BEFORE TAKING DISCIPLINARY ACTION C. CONSULT REP OF MEDICAL DEPARTMENT BEFORE TAKING DISCIPLINARY ACTION V. INDIVIDUALIZED TREATMENT PLAN (CHECK ALL TTHAT APPLY) X A. NO RESTRICTION C. MENTAL HEALTH REPRESENTATIVE REQUIRED B. MEDICAL REPRESENTATIVE REQUÏRED VI. TRANSPORTATION RESTRICTIONS (CHECK ONE) X A. NO RESTRICTION C. WHEELCHAIR VAN B. EMS AMBULANCE D. MULTI-PATIENT VEHICLE (MPV) WILLIAMS, BETTY MD $08/07/2014$ PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF REVIEWER DATE SIGNATURE OF REVIEWER