Ex Parte Clinton David Beck ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                                       ACCEPTED
    03-14-00818-CR
    7850705
    THIRD COURT OF APPEALS
    AUSTIN, TEXAS
    11/16/2015 4:13:59 PM
    JEFFREY D. KYLE
    CLERK
    ZIMMERMANN LAVINE & ZIMMERMANN, P.C.
    ATTORNEYS AT LAW
    770 SOUTH POST OAK LANE, SUITE 620
    HOUSTON, TEXAS 77056                     FILED IN
    713-552-0300 FAX 713-552-0746        3rd COURT OF APPEALS
    AUSTIN, TEXAS
    WWW. TEXASDEFENSELA WYERS.COM
    11/16/2015 4:13:59 PM
    JACK B. ZIMMERMANN                                                          JEFFREY D. KYLE
    JIM E. LAVINE                                                                    Clerk
    TERRI R. ZIMMERMANN
    ~ovember16,2015
    Jeffery D. Kyle
    Oerk of Court
    Third Court of Appeals
    Price Daniel Sr. Building
    209 West 14th St., Room 101
    Austin, Texas 78701
    RE:      Clinton David Beck v. The State of Texas
    Court of Appeals ~umber: 03-14-00818-CR
    Trial Court Case ~umber: CR2011-197
    Dear Mr. Kyle,
    Pursuant to Rule 38.7 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, Mr. Beck sends this
    letter regarding cases decided after the Brief and Reply Brief for Appellant were filed:
    1. Collins v. State, ~o. 11-14-00312-CR, 
    2015 WL 6768734
    , at*4 (Tex. App.- Eastland
    ~ovember 5, 2015): The Eleventh Court of Appeals held that Section 21.12(a)(3) is
    unconstitutional because it incorporates Section 33.021 (b), a statute the Court of Criminal
    Appeals found to be unconstitutional in Ex parte Lo, 
    424 S.W.3d 10
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2013),
    reh'g denied, (Mar. 19, 2014). Because Mr. Beck was convicted of violating Section
    21.12(a)(3) only based on its incorporation of Section 33.021(b), just like Collins, this case
    supports Mr. Beck's argument that his conviction and sentence are void.
    2. Ex parte Fournier and Ex parte Christopher Dowden, WR-82,102-01, 
    2015 WL 6518272
    (Tex. Crirn. App. Oct. 28,2015): The Court of Criminal Appeals granted habeas relief based
    on Ex parte Lo even though the Applicants had not challenged the unconstitutional statute
    at trial. The Court held, "Applicants are entitled to relief under Lo and our subsequent
    decision in Ex parte Chance. In a short per curiam opinion, we granted Chance relief based
    on our judgment in Lo despite Chance's failure to contest the statute's constitutionality at
    trial or on appeal. Consistent with Chance, we set aside Fournier's and Dowden's
    judgments of conviction in Cause ~umbers 1151921 and 1300886, respectively, and remand
    RE:    Clinton David Beck v. The State of Texas
    Court of Appeals Number: 03-14-00818-CR
    Trial Court Case Number: CR2011-197
    those causes to the respective trial courts to dismiss the indictments." I d., at *5. This case
    supports Mr. Beck's argument that he is entitled to relief even though he did not challenge
    the constitutionality of the statute at trial.
    Very respectfully,
    cc: Mr. Joshua Presley (viaE-file)
    Page 2 of 2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-14-00818-CR

Filed Date: 11/16/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/30/2016