Case Information

*1 Upon Receptance of this package Please send a Return Receipt Thank you! RECEIVED IN COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AUG 272015

AbelAcosta, Clerk

Bruce Montgomery *1902424 Meconwell unit 3001 S. Emily DR. Seeville TX. 78102

*2 BRUCE 4. MONTHOME 4 No: 1902424 MfCONNELL UNIT 3001 S. EMILY DR. GEEUILLE TEVAS 78102

AUGUST 26, 2015

To: THE CERK COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS: 8.0. BOX 12308 CARTIOL STATION

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

RE: CAUSE No: 12-098A- APPLICANTS RESULTAL IN APPOSITION TO STATES RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS APPLICCATIAR FOR WRIE OF HABEAS CORPUS 11-07.

DEAR CERK PLEASE FIND ENOLGSED APPLICANTS REPUILAL IN APOSTTION TO STATES RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS APPLICATION FOR WRIE OF HABEAS CORPUS 11-07. TO BE RESPECTFULU FILED IN THE ABOVE CAUSE No: AND FAREMARDED TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AS A PART OF APPLICANTS WRIEING APPLICATION FOR WRIE OF HABEAS CORPUS SUBMISSIONS. THAT WAS FAREMARDED TO THIS COURT ON AUGUST 17, 2015 COURADO COUNTY DISTRICT CERK LENDA HOLMAN.

*3

EVERYE

BRUCE Y. MONTOOMERY

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPERALS OF TEXAS

APPLICANTS REBUTYAL IN OPOSITION TO

STATES RESPONSE TO APPLICANTS APPLICATION FOR WRIE OF HABEAS CORPUS II.OT AND REBUTYAL IN OPOSITION TO ATTURNIS AFFIDAVIT FOR INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL DENEAL.

TO THE HONORABLE SUDDERSI OF THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPERALS OF TEXAS

WOW COMES BRUCE Y. MONTOOMERY APPLICANT-PRO-SE AND WOLD LIKE TO RESPECTFULM SHOUL THIS HONORABLE COURT THE FOLLOWING:

I.

REBUTYAL TO STATES RESPONSE. APPLICANTS WRIE EXHIBIT ATTACHMENT D' OFFICERS AFFIDAVIT FOR PROBABLE CAUSE WARRANT at "S" STATES AFFIGNT HAS PROBABLE CAUSE FOR SAID BELIEF BY REASONS OF THE FOLLOWING 'FACS' AND 'CIRCLMSTANCES. THIS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT HAS GIIVEN TRUE AND CORRECT INFORMATION TO LAW ENFORCEMENT. THEREFORE THE PROBABLE CAUSE WAS ESTABLISHED WHEN AFFIGNT ATTESTED TO THIS

*4 To this section of his affidavit. which gave the mak-istrate suble reason to issue a search warent. when the coult ruled on the motion to determine inadmisss. Billey of evidence and credibulit of the Confidential INFORMAT of APELICANT. The COURT STATES I'm CODING TO GRANT IT. THERE'S No STATEMENT OF WHERE THAT INFORMAT. ION CAME FROM. WHEN THE STATE APPEALED THE APPELATES BRIEF WAS BASED 'WHOUT' ON THE APELIAVIT THAT OFFICER SHOWN IAK SUBMITTED TO THE MABISTRAIE TO SUBSTANT. IATE PROBABLE CAUSE APPLICANT'S APPLICATEN APPENDIX ATTACHMENT 'IS, SHERIFF DEPUTY SHOWN IAK'S APELIAVIT FOR PROBABLE CAUSE SEARCH WARRANT. APPLICANTS APPLICATION APPENDIX ATTACHMENT H' THE STATES APPEALATE BRIEF. THE BRIEF THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY APPLICANTS ATIORNEY DOES NOT STATE RECORD FACIS TO CHALLENLE THAT THE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMAT WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE CONTROLLED BUT WAS RELEASE AND EREDIBLE. NOR DOES THE BRIEF CONTACH ONY INFORMATIOM RELAARDING THE CREDIBILITY OF THE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMAT WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE CONTROLLED BUT. THE BASES OF THE BRIEF WAS RELAARDING THE ONE SENTENCE IN THE APELIAVIT. AFFIRNT HAS ALSO RECEIVED INFORMATIOM OF WARCOTIC ACZIUCY AT THE SUSPECTED PLACE IN THE RECENT PAST. APPLICANTS APPLICATION ATTACHMENT 'I' THE APPELLEE BRIEF at. PABE.'W

*5 Furthermore the Justices of the 1st District Court of Appeals States in their Memorandum and opinion of Pale 8 at the Bottom "We"noté that the affidavit does ADDRESSES THE CREDIBILITY OF THE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMAT WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE CONTROLLED BUT 'AND MONTECMERY' "DOES NOT' CHALLENGE THIS INFORMANTS CREDIBILITY AND RELEABILITY ON APPEAL. THEREFORE THE ISSELLS RELARDIOL THE GRANTING OF THE MOTION AND THE AFFIDAVET FOR PROBABLE CAUSE SEARCH WARRANT AND THE STATES APPEAL WAS BASED ON WHETHER OR NOT THE AFFIDAVET SUBSTANTIATED PROBABLE CAUSE WHICH WAS ESTABLESHED WHEN THE AFFICANT STATES WITHIN THE AFFIDAVET THIS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT HAS LATVEN TRUE AND CORRECT INFORMATION TO LAW EVERCEMENT. MEANING THE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT IN THE CONTROLLED BUT. THE CREDIBILITY AND RELEABILITY WAS IN RELARDS TO THE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMANT WHO MADE THE CONTROLLED BUT. AND THE EVENTS THAT OCLLRED DURING THE CONTROLLED BUT.. THIS LAVE THE MALISTRATE REASON TO ISSUE A SEARCH WARRANT. NOT THE 'ONE' SENTENCE IN THE AFFIDAVIT IN REFERENCE TO WARCOTIC ACTIVITY IN RECEVT PAST.

*6

APPLICANT HAS bemostrated within his application for WRT of HABEAS corpus Not that his counsel did not preselll litluate on appeal of not challewhowd the eroficititl and refiatalitl of the confiderital informant who participated in the confided but. Applicant has shown the two Refugment of ineffective assistance of counsel. Counsels act and omission was at a critical stage of Applicants precedings. The deficient act violated application of amevâmens us. S. const. RELHT to a fAtR and ImParital trial.

11.

When Applicants counsel SuEmited HeZ Affairsit she makes excuses and is attemptiNd to cover up her ioeffective assistance of counsel as a and ommission that were of us. Const. amend. maInitude and DeWId apP. LICANt A far AND ImParital apParthusth for the GRANT. INd of the motion to determine abmissibility of evidence and eroficitl of confiderital informant to be uPHELD ON APPEAL. Applicants counsel suEmitted the motion to contest the eroficitl of the confiderital informant who participated in the confided but. Applicants indez attractmend" "E. The effect on APPEAL does not make challewle to the confiderital informant who participated in the confided but. CREdifictl of RELtABLItit. THE MOTION WAS BASED LIPM DISCREPACITES IN THE ALb. to the Affdavit of depurt SHAWN LAK AND the events that occurred durtow the conrrolled but. FuRtHertode Counsellis refertow to the works "HERE' ON PALE L, the PARABRARY on PALE 7 'IN the present case. ON PALE 8 live 4 where the SEAT. ENE Belins with, Counsell SAtins that the merMing of

*7

The word 'Acorn' in the appelees brief. These referrences are not to be constrived to mean "the confiderntial informant who participated in the confruded bur. There is no definition of the confidential informant established in the brief the effiDANT establishment credibltit when it is stated in AFFINNT THIS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMAT HAS LAVE tRue AND CORRECT INFORMATION TO LAW ENFERCEMENT IN THE PAST. THE words THAT COUNSEL SAID MEANS THIS AND THAT TO SUBSTANTIATE CHALLENGING THE CREDIBILIT AND RELIABILIT OF THE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMAT WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE CONTROUEDS BUT ARE NOT SUPPLIED BY RECORD OR FACT. THE APPEND WAS NOT ABOUT THE IDENTITT OF THE CONFIDENTIAL INFORMAT. IT WAS ABOUT CREDIBILITT AND RELIABILITT BEING ESTABLISHED BY THE AFFINNT IN THE AFFIDANTt TO LAVE REASON FOR PROBABLE CAUSE TO SUBSTANTIATED TO ISSUE A SEARCH WARRANT BASED ON PROBABLE CAUSE FROM THE CONTROUED BUT.

I I

Fullhermate there is no facts based on record the counsel was responsible for applicants cases that were bissmised due to her representation. There is a E. mall in the states APPENDIX OF A COMMUNICATION TO THE STATES ATTARNEL AND APPLICANTS ATTARNEL ABOUT CHARLES IN ALISTIN COUNTY TEXAS DATED SAWUART ON, 2014. APPLICANTS P.EA WAS ENTERED ON DECEMBER 19, 2013. PRIVR TO THE E. mALL. THEtE IS A CASE DECILNE NOTICE FROM EALLE LAKE TEXAS ON SAWUART 16. 2014. THERE ARE NO REPORTER RECORDS SHOWCML FACIS OF THE OTHER CHARLES BISMISSED WERE THE DIRECT RESULT OF COUNSELS DOTNG. THE FELON P. EEA MEME. RANDIUM DES NOT MENTION THE OTHER CASES WERE BISMISSED AS PART ... CONT ON P.O.G.

*8 of the Pler Alrement, this could have well been the Plea beat or offer that was the result of the state PRESENTING. To apPlicant in which COUNSEL VOTCED ON APPLICANTS BEHALF, SEE: APPENDIY ATTACHMENTS OF STATES RESPONSE at F. 6, AND I.

APPEICANT ASSERTS THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE PROBABILITY THAT HAD COUNSEL LETTbATE HES APPEAL PROPERTI THE GLITCOME OF HES CASE COULD HAVE BEEN DETERENT AND HE WAS PRESUB LCEED DUE TO COUNSELS ACTS AND OMMISSTONS. APPLICANT RECEIVED A 10 Year SENTENCE As WPPosed to a 25 Year SENTENCE WHICH WAS MENIUM DILE TO ENHANCEMENTS.

PRAIER WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSERVED APPLICANT PRATS THAT THIS HONORABLE COURT WELL CARANT HEM THE REOUESTED RELIEF AS STATED IN HES APPLICATTON FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS H.OT.

SILVED ON THIS THE 26th bAN of August 2015

Bruce Montgomery Beuce

(6)

*9

CERTIFICATE

Applicant Bruce Montgomey wa 1902424 HeregI DOES CERTICH THAT THIS HIS RESULTAL OF THE STATES RESPONSE TO APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS H:OT WAS PLACED IN THE MORL. BOX AT THE ME CONNELL LUNG TIDES:ID ON August 26, 2015 TO THE CERK OF THE COURT OF CERMENAL APPEALS.

ON THIS THE ${26}^{\text{th}}$ DAY August of 2015

Bruce Montgomer, Bruce Montg Bruce Montgomer, 1902424 MECONNELL UNIT 3001 S. Emily DR. beeville T6. 78102