Kevin Balditt v. State ( 2015 )

TH E. HOTTL£
C-OUIU" Of APPGAUS
rr
- neeves 3"«snc6 t 3
2.00 c^oLOitosA lt)
— Za
lO —i.—«
3 -_ -n
fe §
I
SalditT
TK,
VIA IA.S. AAA i
TiME To PtUe
I of
Cause No . (W-i5-0M.«3i "
Tk.;al CovlkT Wo. 2.
THe c&agt
TWE STArB of T'^as Saij HwTWNiog
p
ro >"
Appellant's M°tiom "To gx-rewptuas to
THAT THIS riffJ^ABLE £iMi«T £iCT£nD THC T//i/i£
TO FIl£ MIS SftlCF AnJ in 5».-.PPC2T 0? HIS d£QttcST SHOWS:
I - APPtU-AW is A
is kjctt
'1.
H AppEaflM- has wevm wqustBp p6*. " c'v:tc^/0;J. w Mft
S. APPeU-AMT WflJ, Bee^ WrfSKeCBSMfc ,M O
crJ U.S. po3T^u mail- Por Oe/-.iAA/iersrri
AFFlPAf.-
7.
8. %elM SeeKs * (j.o) ^ ♦d*^ 4* prop^L
ei 11*&4e -\w-e.
/\jbrf«rn -(vU
pp THAT
dATc
the"
foP- ?0B-
- tLeeves
S*
D«*Tlt rcr
Toes no.
10
a \anJjt op
-pHc of
of
%M
TDLjiON*.
=! c: -\
£ ?
£
O r-
h m
1! H
2 X