Sims, Gary Eugene ( 2015 )

/l/V, /0_?£*/S f^JO '«•* RECEIVED COURTOF IN cmniHM.APPEAL -^ xv the Abe!Acosia,Cte* COURT OF CfUHnXUAL APPEALS PETTTXOM FDR DXSCRETXDJVARY flEVXEW OF THE court of appeals fxfth d i s t r i c t o f texas Pit Dallas AID. 05-I5-OOG&5-C.R &f\RV eu&ene Ex:ms~. Appbllmnt V. TriE STATE £>F TEXAS •, APPELLEE DA/ APPEAL FR0m.THE.aQ3i nd VUQXCXPiL DISTRICT COURT DALLAS CDUA/Tl TEXfiS TRIAL C£>6tfT CAUSE y\^F-0^W5^5 STATEmFA/T OF THE C/4SE „ / N&TUHE OF 1HB CASE. * „ . \ , ERRORS of court of APP&als Error(i), The. c&arF of appeals was in abuse. oP Oisc*rek\ov\ hy Df5ryifrr& appeal -For wan 4 of tfurtsciiGtioyi. w3-Y-5 Error &)/The courh ofi appv®te> waz> m ctbustL &p of sere Hon, gy rulfa e ihcu-f APf&uj \m*$ untf/nely*, £> TKTKL COURT EKftDRS Error fix Tn'&L courF abuse 1+Discretion in not Holding £Vfdenifary Heahh-Bi . ^7 Error texsta-fc. Procedural RUte is Vh!" B Err©r &)* Oehic/I of fflrofarmehF &F ^oun"i',— *! Error til* The Ft-fFh ^m^yidm^eM RtehFrr*be Heard-l& ErrtrC5\ The SixFk ftm^n&m^+Ri d ^ihir^crim^pf^m}-^ EYPar^vittanueva^SasSwtes^i^ 3 EY Par+eMar&eM &l*j swhd2&LCr^cri^JPP. mi) 4 ExPcfr^sR^r\\er\1V\ Sw^3H^(Te&trfm./W*tfef)- _ H EXp'Qrt&i crozJ&y *£wfi 5w&dJ$z?l(r&t cfm.APf.wrtL _5 /^ayes V.S^k 53-gSvi/a*/ &27(T&,crim,/fr>fJ^7& £ Tbi/WServd V, Sa1 Y\ x373 U* 5,£? 5tSW tcfr.2€?pB-- 7 Bl>ocK>77^/7 i/. .scott aa,Fic/ shocuk cfirJwVL-Sl T(QiunSe,nd K S*tn\ 37a 3*3&A Lf F?^W/(shk'Ctr.a&>lL jB Town^end V.s*uf/l^?>^a(/*5t£73^Q*::t65^ "6 Trevfn o v» Sk?h SLS SW9*d "^Cl^CftmJ^ff^._ ? ^trk/^/^ v- w**z,Hirt (=> u,^>*LL&Q^&l -3 ftfchorel&osi l/> wrfekFiHos USsae&CwrSii-- Jo ^odb^r® V.Kelly^,^7 xj.S ,3QgCJ*l7N2 Jo W^rd V>wkl4i"UFl^teSS^l&&tf STATUTES J4A/J0 5 Ar-K HH»B2 _ _ '_ _ _ _ 5 U> S, Coajst* Amend. fcv/^5 — 7 J 9 la.S, CQA/ST.Am-end* 6 _ -___'_ _ 9 U. 5. C ^ S L ^ e i r i 5j£6l. _ _ J£> Art-* Ivs^oi-. /o_ _ _• _ ( i which on '3unedciAO)5. Dismissed Appeal Par wa/ih of Jurisdiction . STATEMENT OF THE CASE A Jury convicted defendant of ae^ravaied sexual assault and assessed jPu/Ushjnent ar CvnPfnerneMt for life.(fiRll 10Z-/03) * /VATUflE OF WE CASE The dendoint 5o objection unde,r Texc*s Hale of appellate- FrocedirexHH.m (QXfk^i;That state's Remediable. Error c£ the trialc&urtfa") Qenercrily h court of appeals Mush not otM-icmed or reversed fod^rn&nt or dismiss omappe.al *I-Pn;jr> The trial court's erroneous acHo/7 or pe-Pusa) 1d £*cr- Prevents the. PtoRerprescniaifon of a cas^c to the. ceourt oP appealsiaW Gft me ^r/-»/ cjaurF cam correct-its action oR-fallure to act atfon of the case te> the aPP&liats court and tWat error c rule, ho o trfej c&uHk r-e-ftj sal fc? Permit a de4h^cicfnt /© /n&Jte -on oU^r oP- Proof* a trial c&ur+s faVure. -to conduct a Proper B^t^o^? he^r/ti^E?, z?/%^ -a tribal c&urtzi Pa//are h> tw&ki* fi/nd/k" £ n&GUjV^ hYlctfic/ fz>snake ftule yy,Vv bv evaluate his claim Ce. s, fiePus\v\ urt is CdirecteAJto step fn and order the triad Court ta correct the situctttow'.The ker/ to RuJe-^rWvfs that there rwu^t be ol)6/se itk discration in so dismiss s 33 J(cQa7 \ And HH*HfyYf)&) Corpus, Tbe^Sth Wstrict counFvHidalso counH sumariN denied the. sate application >6S befns fp ivo has. AppI lea nt