Smith, Calvin Wayne ( 2015 )


Menu:
  • \»>Q>\'¢ »~*"\\ \1~"<‘_1;“;3 --c.»,g; q/\ .- L|;? .‘ OS
    , C_, <;')'\_,\ Q_'“{ Q_',~ \'~" C_ \``=;I``X.."``r"l "."x``\Q. L \``:\ \.'T" F~’W‘:“:. \“_``\ L _'"
    w 1 h n v `` 1 a % °"\_\\;_j 1¢2»``§.='1<~3 1110-5 C_,‘.l‘ m
    X;_\A(>\;:§K'T&_ Q,Y~\L\L]_U \./\) \/S“:\\ \``\* `` " n y v k
    *€ \_ DIS. rrz:.r_LT <;osz
    ©C\L~LJT~\$ Qc>um¢"r#? ``Tl;»E)`` T``<;’.> k;`` I..\_E
    \~\‘J; § @B;TF_CT``J:OQ ”l``c' 'T\~&\;_ g‘r'(;qu_-‘
    mm mmm<,. w \_~Qm W{§j E©EH“'@Y‘E@ UN
    C)\2 \>E\’§ y _ ©©URT OF©RMVJHNAIL APPEALS
    SEP 212015'
    . SQ``I_\B c;c>u\!l_'{ "``
    now 110/mas R(>p\-\ ch~A~ CJ@L``\!IF``¢ \/D`` §m§¥@q§w©?§€§@©g§:k ``3.
    \A>QL,\ c>\~ mo\-szw~( Fo\'a \,\@,G\(€3 gee.bcw§¢ l `` %
    . ~. , ~\ _ \)>e’ivv\~'§s``~ ‘Y\: *“"'
    c ©\_»¢YL\`` l<‘# W'?~v\?‘\~¢ \5:\ \?PL‘ ‘;“Q"’"&"S C/``r>§l Q';‘&~\Qr~. ¥O l-\;b Y:?:‘ZZ>"S ;L$
    TL/LD``XC"' F{L \)" "`` ' § nw
    q "`` L§\\z``l.v::r wwm*vg s=\ucms+ \'l z<>"S ’
    ah O\ G``RQ§Q{L‘ A ) \ R€§,(><:)D$@.
    ``Yc> 'T'\~lEL-'L»OHC>QRE.\¢E ``SU\DC>\'-.``;. (> LC
    ``I_
    @S~-?.@;C)H%``T 'c'_ `` ' .' . ‘ ' ~
    'DQE_LQ § C g§_\ ``:L £v``he 1%3 QC\ wj"``d"¢'\c°*t`` 0"5&"'<\``<:¥ CG @1~ Q~,\l-``~
    \Q~L,_l RPP:L.AA tz\ '\ elqu P‘i\d'v\c§{(,m__»{-e<£ mc¢z$c')v\~m\b\_g W§»~.
    ' ' ``(~Q ' s ‘ . \¢- - `` ‘ -
    {``£__£ at 4 d “"-``*3`` \'RWSS L.R{``_$ -k-\,-»~Q¥ $;:;.\``C\ m O.:‘_l\= _`` .. _
    v \Yv qoc¢’\ \~u>,\~\er ‘*Y" "S SLJQWAL§``
    »<> ~U §§ m ``
    “ C-(’V \R P(>\._\`` ((H D.X_ RS_``
    1 ’ ’ »~ -``
    ">'1¢_,»~¢%~5`` ``§``C"P`` M``OT SQC@B
    ~ '1\: cg ;Evz -
    ``T_ LQL\[;\»~L w VIC'L_``
    \“\ F 11:\ ‘
    . . <>PL# w.v\~¢\; \¢ ~
    qp€zlL/WZUL _ “F”wbec\§&~
    \``) /\~.\ .k`` ci Q'\r c"_ <_ gck ~Q. c.(. »_(~i_‘_§``~_(?;'\;_v?_-_“zn.\;~Léi¢?./_j_a/__Z.BQ.L,§
    QQ hub wl ‘a``§“/??’?LM '/
    QY=\\,\r{r\ ’LA")`` ,S°.v\r~\\“{~\\
    'T\>C§-I\>\:X. 331 ¢>'1<£>¢\
    \?\b\oea¥$bvw Uv=\{¥
    \10``1\ *?m’?>SZZ
    'Plbi"l_evw@ “``\'E``\\
    WRIT NO. WOS-ZGOGB-T(C)
    (Ex parte) Calvin W. Smith `` In The 283rd Judicial
    District Court
    .Dallas County, Texas
    RECE|V
    APPLICANT'$ osJECTION To THE COURT OF CR|
    STATE'S RESPONSE, FINDING oF FACT AND oRDER
    TO THE HONORABLE.JUDCE OF SAID COURT: ~
    . Aco a,C!erk
    Now comes Applicant Calvin. W. Smith, by way of objection to the State's response,
    finding of fact and arder.
    I.
    It would be a complete fundamental miscarriage of justice in light of Murray v.
    Carrier 477, U.S. 496, 91, L.Ed. 2d, 397, lOO Sct; 2639 (1986). If this court adopt the
    trial court's Aug. 12, 2015 response and order.
    Applicant asserts that such decision or conclusion by the State, taht Applicant has
    failed to demonstrate why he was unable ot present these claims in his previous writ.
    Applicant asserts that the State's contention in the light of Applicant attached exhibits
    (l) and (2), as set out in the T.C.C.P. 11.07 Sec. (4). Due to exhibits one and two being
    newly discovered evidence, which supporting'the police corruption that Applicant argued
    at hsi initial court trial, which was two newspaper articles on the Lead Detective Dennis
    Morrow who also worked and set up my case, was caught being in the police corruptino,
    identical ot Applicant's allegations duing his trial.'
    Applicant further asserts that the newly discovered evidence and arguments submitted
    therein, meet all the requirements of T.C.C.P. Art. ll.O7 Sec. (4) as set out in Ex parte
    Brook 
    219 S.W. 3d
    . 396 (Tex. App-_2007), and Schlup v. Delo 
    513 U.S. 296
    . 327-28, 115 Sct;
    851} 130_, L.Ed. zd. 308 (1995). ' ' _ _
    Which the court in Ex parte Brook 219, S.W; 3d. 396, (Tex. App. 2007); under a 11.07
    sec. (4). Review stated that we may not consider the merit of an application unless it
    includes sufficient specific facts'establishing'by a preponderance of the evidence that,
    but for a constitutional violation, no rational juror would have found Applicant guilty.
    The court went on to state that it_must that this necessarily includes a prima facie show-
    ing of actual innocence in order for the Applicant to demonstrate that the constitutional
    violation at his trial resulted in a miscarriage of justice which such showing would allow
    said court to consider a constitutional claim which otherwise would have been barred by
    Sec. (4) of the T. C. C. P.
    Which Applicant asserts that as of yet he has not been offorded such opportunity. In
    .the light of McQuiggens v. Perkins 133 Sct. 1924 (2013) Applicant assert that in the light
    of his newly discovered evidence seen in attached exhibits (1) and (2) under writ No.
    W05-26048-T(C) thatApplicanthasnedea prima facia showing of actual innocence, entitling
    `` him to a hearing on the merits because the two exhibits demonstrate the same identical
    police corruption that Applicant argued was going on with the same corrupt officer with
    the Garland, Texas Police Department, officer Dennis Morrow. Therefore Applicant asserts
    that it who be unreasonable to disregard Applicant's newly discovered exhibits (1) and (2)
    in the light of McQuiggens v. Perkins 133 Sct. 1924 (2013); Ex parte Brook 
    219 S.W. 3d
    .
    366 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) and Schlup v. Delo 
    513 U.S. 298
    , 327-28, 115 Sct. 851 (1995)
    which the following courts state; that under an actual innocnet claimj one with a prima
    facia showing , which in this case, that had it not been for the police corruption by
    Garland Police officer Denniw Morrow as depicted in Applicant‘s exhibits (1) and (2) no
    reasonable juror would have prevailed on his pretrial motion to suppress the drugs that
    was illegally obtained by an unlawful search of the motel room that Applicant rented and
    had standings.
    PRAYER
    Applicant pray that this court will review Applicant's writ along with his two newly
    discovered exhibits (1) and (2) and determine that Applicant has made the necessary prima
    facia showing to meet the requisites of T.C.C.P. Art. 11.07 Sec. (4), and thereafter grant
    Applicant due relief.
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE``
    I, Calvin W. Smith, now comes before this court in good faith, state_that all of the
    above is true to the best of Applicant's knowledge free from perjury.
    Date executed H%§,\jl:t D?© j 020 )5 y q&hv(/)L/W M/
    Calvin W. Smith
    TDCJ-ID #1370784
    Robertson Unit
    12071 FM 3522
    Abilene, Texas 79601
    Amcl. A<;``os'r/\
    SllARON Kl'Il.l.ER
    I’Rl£$|l)lN('iJUl)(i|Z (``|.I'IRK
    ,~ re < ($lZ)/lf).\=|$$|
    P.O. BOX 12308, CAPllOL S l Al ION
    l,Awlu';NCl': lz. Ml".\'lcus .~ .. t ;.
    Cm<:lwl..lolleoN AUS] le H~XAS 7871 l _ sl/\N sCllll,ll/u;
    Mll\'l'; KEASLIԤR GliN|-``.RA!.(``.OUNSIE|.
    n/\RBARA P. lll€livlc\' ("'2>“"-‘""°
    i:l,sA ALCALA
    nER'r RlCHARl)s<)N
    lucle P. YEARv
    l)Avll) NEWELL
    moses
    September l, 2015
    Calvin W. Smith #1370784
    Robertson Unit j
    _ 12071FM 3522
    `` Abilene, TX 79601
    RE: Trial Court Case #W05-26048-T(C)
    Dear Mr. Smith:
    After a thorough search of our records, we find that you do not have a Writ of Habeas Corpus
    filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals at this time. If you have any further questions or
    concerns, please direct them to the District Cle'rk in the convicting county where you originally
    filed the application
    I am-herewith returning your documents ``
    Sincerely,
    Abel M>sia, ``Clerk``
    AA/kd
    Enclosure
    SUPREME CouRT BUILDING, 201 WEsT 14TH STREET, ROOM 106, AUSTrN, TEXAs 78701
    WEBsiTE www.CcA.couRTs.sTATE.Tx.us
    OmEQ>F ZC.:Gm E~O§ OOC_~._. Om OW=<:Z>H_ >Eom>~rm Om .~.mX>w
    CT IC ws©.,mox C%m/UBG.GV_\ ma>,EOz_.HW L.MMWw N&E.Gmd[®m.. §zm< moémm
    DS
    wjy._,m O~u .~\m X>m t
    emza.j\ nom . ft §§ 1
    §_.<_z <<>em_ >eows_ csa
    O>_l<_Z <<>w__.mzm..§ §§
    iam umwa w . ___._.______==__=._.;.=__..._._______._._..r_=...____:.=:
    

Document Info

Docket Number: WR-71,453-05

Filed Date: 9/21/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/30/2016