Weisner, Sean ( 2015 )

•8l-/$
RE. CAUSE NO. |A//a. /ffys*f -U(A\_
7—'-="*••*—^ p
i
NOTION TO OBTAIN DOCUMENTS AND TRIAL REckps IN FORMA pmippptc
DEAR DISTRICT CLERK; :--K : ,--:
• ••.„ ~K"
PLEASE FILE-COPY AND BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ^fim ^/7'fyfULS
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT. ALSO, ' PLEASE RETURN , CERTl7l^7^F~
SERVICE FILE-DAT.E-STAMPED MARK.
YOUR ASSISTANCE IS GREATLY APPRECIATED.
SIMCERELY,
/ -y
WR:2:0 20ir;.
c;c' (C0PY) ' vAte»Adoste,Gi@irk
MOTION DENIED •
' DATE: M-(3'l^
BY:_PC,
'('•'
CAUSE NO . ItftO' S&lfferb (ifO
••••*..
pX tftfff S^(/Jfcl6TieK J IN THE ApgALs JUDICAL
•VS. § DISTRICT COURT OF
THE STATE OF TEXAS § COUNTY, TEXAS
MOTION TO OBTAIN DOCUMENTS AND TRIAL RECORDS IN FORMA PAUPERIS
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
NOW COKES ,3^0^ td^lSMS- ' PRO SE DEFENDANT . IN THIS SAID
AND NUMBERED CAUSE, RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THIS COURT TO HEAR
THIS MOTION TO OBTAIN DOCUMENTS AND TRIAL RECORDS TO ENABLE
DEFENDANT FOR HIS PREPARATION OF FILING HIS MOTION FOR NEWLY
DISCOVERED EVIDENCE, ARTICLE 40.001, PROCESS AND WILL SHOW
THIS COURT THE FOLLOWING IN PURSUIT OF HIS DUE PROCESS:
-fr-
JURISDICTION OF THE COURT IS. INVOKED PPURSUA.NT TO VERNON'S
ANNOTED TEXAS GOVERNMENT -CODES; § 552.203 AND § 552.223 RULES
OF THE TEXAS GOVERNMENT RULES OF PRACTICE IN DISTRICT AND COUNTY
COURT'S; ARTICLE '§ 40.01 ET- SEQ. ..OF THE TEXAS CODE OF CRIMINAL
PROCEDURES; THE PRIVACY ACT U.S.C.A. 552(B) OF THE,. TEXAS OPEN
RECORDS ACT (TORA); AND RULES 34.5, 34.6 AND 53(1); (2) OF THE
TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE AND ALL CASES CITED INFRA.
; II.
PETITONER IS CURRENTLY CONFINED AND RESTRAINED ILLEGALLY
OF. HIS LIBERTY. IN THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE-
INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION PURSUANT ''TO A JUDGEMENT OF CONVICTION
IN THE ABOVE NUMBERED CAUSE. PETITIONER IS A PAUPER WITHOUT
ADEQUATE FUNDS TO PURCHASE HIS TRIAL RECORDS, AND OTHER REQUESTED
•DOCUMENTS, AND IS ENTITLED TO AN EVIDENTARY HEARING TO DETERMINE
HIS "INDIGENCY" BEFORE THIS HONORABLE COURT.
. p ,
III.
PETITIONER HAS EXHAUSTED HIS STATE REMEDIES AS REQUIRED PUR-
.._._SJUAN.T_jrj3_AJCTJ£LE_^ —P-ET-I-T-I-QNE-R-S-
TIME HAS -EXPIRED TO FILE A PRE-DISCRETidNARYT REVIEW AND THE
COURT ISSUED A MANDATE ON THE CAUSE SOME TIME AFTER. THE PETI
TIONER NOW FILES THIS MOTION FOR HIS RECORDS IN ORDER TO PREPARE
AND FILE ARTICLE 40.001, NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE, TO A HIGHER
COURT. PETITIONER IS ENTITLED TO FILE MOTION FOR NEWLY DISCOVERED
EVIDENCE, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 40.001 V.A.C.C.P., AND BRINGS
THIS MOTION BEFORE THE HONORABLE COURT FOR HIS RECORDS. PETI
TIONER HAS STATED AND WILL DECLARE IN THIS MOTION, THAT HE IS
"INDIGENT" AND SEEKS THESE RECORDS IN FORMA PAUPERIS THROUGH
THIS COURT. THE RECORDS MUST BE AFFORDED AT NO COST TO PETI
TIONER IN THIS CAUSE.
SEE. ABNOR V. STATE, 712 S.W.2d 136, 140 (1986)
CRAUDER V. STATE, 933 S.W.2d 273, 275 (1996).
SNOKE V. STATE, 780 S.W.2d 212 (1989)
EVITTS V. LUCEY, 464 U.S.. 387; 105 S.CT. 830; 83L.Ed. 821 (1985)
GRIFFIN V. ILLINOIS, 365 U.S. 12; 76 S.CT. 585; 100 L.Ed.2d (1956)
'" "' MEYER V. CHICAGE, 404 U.S. 189; 92 S.CT. 410; 30 L. Ed. 2d 892 (1963),
TO IMPOSE A FINANCIAL BURDEN UPON AN INDIGENT PRISONER OF
THE STATE OF TEXAS FOR THE EXERCISE OF A STATE AND FEDERAL RIGHT
TO SUE FOR HIS LIBERTY IS TO DENY THAT PRISONER OF HIS STATE
AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE
LAWS, AND IS A [DIRECT] VIOLATION OF HIS. "FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, "
U.S.C.A. (14).
IN ABNOR V. STATE, AT 140... THE SUPREME COURT OF. APPEALS
FOR TEXAS-HELD THAT:
"...ONCE AVENUE OF PAAELLATE REVIEW ARE ESTABLISHED THEY
[MUST] BE KEPT FREE OF UNREASONED DISTINCTIONS, THAT CAN
ONLY [IMJPEDE OPEN AND EQUAL, ACCESS TO THE COURTS"...
IN GRIFFIN V. ILLINOIS, SUPRA., THE COURT CLEARLY STATED:.
"...THERE CAN BE [NO] EQUAL JUSTICE WHERE THE KIND OF TRIAL •
A MAN GETS DEPENDS ON THE .AMOUNT OF MONEY HE HAS."
IN' LANE V. BROWN, SUPRA. , THE SUPREME COURT [REjAFFIRMED
THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF GREEN, SUPRA BY STATING:
". . .DESTITUDE DEFENDANTS [MUST] BE AFFORDED AS ADEQUATE APPEL-
L-A-T-E R-E-V-I-E-W AS DEFEND-A-NTS WH'OW7-H"ATE~MO"NEY``TO-BTTr^THETR
TDTflT T'DTNMOi'-'DTnmc jsMrV n o n r~\ r> r» n
' *' IN SMITH V. BENNET, SUPRA., THE COURT FURTHER NOTED:
"...THESE PRINCIPLES ARE NOT LIMITED TO DIRECT APPEALS ' FROM
CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS BUT EXTEND ALIKE TO "POST-CONVICTIONS
AS WELLT77"
PETITIONER CONTENDS THE NEED FOR HIS TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS ENT-
f':
ITLED TO HIM THE SAME, AND SAID RECORDS ARE IMPERATIVE TO PRESENT
HIS CASE IN LIGHT MOST FAVORABLE TO HIS CAUSE. WITHOUT THESE
RECORDS HE CANNOT PROVE HIS INNOCENCE TO A HIGHER COURT.
PETITIONER IS ENTITLED TO THE EQUAL PROTECTIONS AND DUE PRO
CESS OF LAW WHICH PROTECTS AND REQUIRES THE STATE TO FURNISH
AN INDIGENT PRISONER SUCH RECORDS WITHOUT CHARGE.
SEE. UNITED STATES V. GLESS, 317 F.2d 200 (1963)
THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS DUE PROCESS GUARANTEE OF FUNDAMEN
TAL FAIRNESS, REQUIRES THE STATE TO PROVIDE A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT
WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE MEANINGFULLY" IN A JUDICIAL
PROCEEDING IN WHICH HIS LIBERTY IS AT STAKE.
SEE. AKER V. OKLAHOMA, 470 U.S. at 76; 105 S.CT. 1098
Af.SO, THE SUPREME mnRT Pr.RflRr.V qrPflTPn-
"...IT IS A CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS ACCESS TO HIS RECORDS WHICH
MAKES [ANY] APPELLATE REVIEW MEANINGFUL..."
SEE. GARNER V. CALIFORNIA, 89 S.CT. at 581 (1969)
ACCORDINGLEY, THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT THAT THE STATE [MUST]
PROVIDE THE TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS FOR. AN EFFECTIVE DEFENSE- THE
COURT HEAVILY EMPHASIZED IN GRIFFIN:
"...THE HOLDINGS IN THE LINE OF CASES BEGIN WITH GRIFFIN,
351, U.S. 12 (1956), INVOLVING A CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS RIGHTS
OF ACCESS TO A. TRIAL TRANSCRIPT, AND ARE FIRMLY [ROOTED]
IN BOTH THE DUE PROCESS AND THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF
THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT.
SEE ALSO, EVITTS V. LUCEY, SUPRA, at 830,
(CRIMINAL DEFENDANT HAS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A FREE
TRIAL TRANSCRIPT TO PETITION THE SUPREME COURT) "...Id, at
830..." SEE ALSO, BUNDY V. WILSON, 815 F.2d 125-130-31 (1987);
ALLEN V. DUCKWORTH, 6 F.3D 458 (1993), (STATE IS NOT 'PERMIT
TED WITH ONE TO GRANT SUCH RIGHT, AND WITH THE OTHER HAND...
[TAKE] IT AWAY IN AN ARBITRARY FASHION) ... '
THE COURT HAS THE DUTY UNDER VERNONS ANNOTED TEXAS GOVERNMENT
CODE'S 552.203 AND 552.223, TO DUTIFULLY ACT UPON AN APPLICATION
... -FOR P-UBLI-C—RECORDS THE—GOUR4L---0F-~G-RI-MI-NA-L~A-PP-E-A-LrS-WA-RR-A'NTED",
"IT IS A DIRECT VIOLATION OF AN INDIGENT DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS
AS AFFORDED BY THIS STATE'S LAW OF CONSTITUTION, AND THE UNITED
STATES CONSTITUTION, TO [WITHHOLD] THE TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS AND
THE STATEMENT OF FACTS, WHEREIN A PRISONER HAS DUTIFULLY SHOWN
HIS INDIGENCY TO THE COURTS." SEE. WHITE V. STATE, 828 S.W.2d
15, 17 (TEX.APP. EL PASO 1990)(RELYING ON BRITTON V. NORTH CARO
LINA, 404 U.S. 226, 92 S.CT. 430-31, L.Ed.2d 4.00 (1971).
IN MCBEE V. STATE, 711 S.W.2d at 257 (TEX.CRIM.APP. 1986),
THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS STATES: "...THE LANGUAGE IS [MAND
ATORY, IF THE DEFENDANT IS FOUND TO BE INDIGENT, THE TRIAL COURT
IS BOUND TO "FURNISH" SAID RECORDS WITHOUT COST..." (CITING
BRITTON), AND THAT... "IT IS A STATE AND FEDERAL PROGENCY, AND
IT IS ASSSUMED THAT THE .RECORDS [WILL] BE MADE AVAILABLE TO
THE DEFENDANT. . .AND. . .THE STATE BEARS THE [BURDEN] OF [DISPROV
ING THE VALUE... OR ANY OTHER ALTERNATIVES ='= = " SEE, UNITED STATES
V. LOGING, 601 F.2d 2055 (1979); RUSH V. U.5, 5559 F.2d 455 (1977).
• P-ETTTTONER--HAS"• A"VESTED-HIGHT "A'RD~A"'TIB'ERTY-TNTElTES"T~ITrTrHTS~ ~
CAUSE. IT IS A "MINISTERIAL"; ACT AND DUTY OF THE COURT [MUST]
RECOGNIZE ITS DUTY TO ACT ACCORDINGLY.
WADE V. MAYS, 689 S.W.2d 893 (1985);
BARONOWSKI -V. TEDFORD,. C. A. NO H-90-330, HOUSTON (1994);
BRADY V. MARYLAND, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). • _
PETITIONER, IS AN INDIGENT PRISONER OF THE STATE OF TEXAS. HE
WAS FOUND TO BE INDIGENT BY THIS COURT IN CAUSE NO. fcJ/V^-"ft}) ,
AND PETITIONER'S INDIGENT STATUS HAS NOT CHANGED. SEE PETI
TIONER'S DECLARATION OF . INABILITY TO PAY COST HERETO ATTACHED
TO MOTION AND TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN-FORMA
PAUPERIS DATA REGARDING PETITIONERS, TRUST FUND ACCOUNT.
9
THE STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS ARE UNEQUIVOCALLY CLEAR THAT THE
PETITIONER IN THIS CAUSE IS ENTITLED TO TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS AND
REQUESTED RECORDS. THEREFORE, WITH RESPECT TO THE FOREGOING,
AND THE FOLLOWING, PETITIONER WILL RESPECTFULLY SHOW THIS HONOR
ABLE COURT WHICH RECORDS ARE ESSENTIAL IN ORDER FOR HIM TO ADE
QUATELY CONSTRUCT A MEANINGFUL. MOTION FOR NEWLY DISCOVERED EVI-
-DE-NeE—I-N-^-tJ-IT—FOR—H-I-S—L-I-B-ERTY—TN—TH1"S—CA--US-E^——
I '
t d -n
LIST OF REQUESTED DOCUMENTS
.UffilCIMENia.
2. GRAND JURY MINUTES
3. DOCKET SHEETS
4. ALL SEARCH WARRANTS IN THIS CAUSE
5.. -TRIAL TRANSCRIPTS
6. STATEMENT OF FACTS
7. CLERKS RECORDS
8. ALL ARREST RECORDS
9. ALL APPLICATIONS FOR SUBPOENAS
10. JURY VOIR DIRE
11. NAMES OF ALL WITNESSES
12. ALL WITNESS STATEMENTS
13. ALL POLICE REPORTS USED AT ANY STAGE OF PROCEEDING HOWEVER
TENTATIVE
14. ALL EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE IN THIS CAUSE
15. ALL STATES EXHIBITS USED IN THIS CAUSE
16. ALL DEFENSE EXHIBITS USED IN THIS CAUSE
JJ7_. ORDERS APPOTNTTNG COUNSELS AND DATE THSR-SOg ;
18. ANY MEDICAL TESTING OR OPINIONS OF THE- DEFENDANT IN THIS
CAUSE
19. ALL MOTIONS FILED BY THE STATE IN THIS CAUSE
•20. ALL MOTIONS FILED BY THE DEFENSE IN THIS CAUSE
21. RECORD OF ALL PRE-TRIAL HEARINGS IN THIS CAUSE
22. COURT'S RULING ON ALL PRE-TRIAL HEARINGS *,
23. CHARGE OF GUILD/INNOCENCE
24. CHARGE OF PUNISHMENT
25. JUDGEMENT OF CONVICTION
26. ANY PLEA OFFERS BY THE STATE IN THIS CAUSE •
27. DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
28.. DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF APPEAL .
29. DESIGNATION OF RECORD OF APPEAL
30. ANY DEALS OR AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE STATE AND ANY WITNESS
IN THIS CUASE
31. ANY RELEVANT RECORD IN THE STATE'S POSSESSION OR CLERKS
POSSESSION
SAID RECORDS ARE IN THE POSSESSION OF THE COURT REPORTER
-A^D-TH-E-C-L-ERK-OF-THE DISTRICT COURT OF AND FOR
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, PETITIONER RESPECTFULLY
MOVES THE HONORABLE COURT TO GRANT THIS MOTION IN ALL REGARDS,
WHICH WILL ENABLE HIM TO PREPARE IN SUIT OF HIS LIBERTY.
PETITIONER . RESERVES THE RIGHT TO FILE MOTION FOR NEWLY
DISCOVERED EVIDENCE IN THE TRIAL COURT.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
,AJfaanjfo/tUr».n 1rl1-tS
CSINIB02/CINIB02 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE 03/17/15
ST55/LS000fag IN-FORMA-PAUPERIS DATA ©8s3£:56
TDCJ'tt: 01718500 SID#: 056797E4 LOCATION; STILES INDIGENT DTE:
NAME;; WEISNER, SEAN BEGINNING PERIOD; 08/01/14
PREVIOUS TDCJ NUMBERS::
CURRENT BOLs 48., 59 TOT HOLD AMT ; 0.00 3MTH TOT DEP: 50.00
SMTH DEPs 50.00 6MTH AUG BAL : £.87 6MTH AUG DEP: 8„ 33
MONTH HIGHEST BALANCE TOTAL DEPOSITS MONTH HIGHEST BALANCE TOTAL DEPOSITS
01/15 £5.06 0.00 10/14 0.06 0.00
12/14 ' 50.06 50,00 09/14 0,06 0.00
11/14 0.06 0„'00 08/14 0.06 0.00
PROCESS DATE HOLD AMOUNT HOLD DESCRIPTION
STATE OF TEXAS^COUNTY OFj£tJ CV%(S\T\
ON THIS THE HrDAY OF VyfhkCpS , _, I CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS A TRUE,
•" "'NflLTERED
COMPLETE,AND UN COPY MADE"
Hi BY ME OF INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE
COMPUTER DATABASE REGARDING "HE OFFENDER'S ACCOUNT, MP SIG:
PF1--HELP PF3-EMD ENTER NEXT TDCJ NUMBER: t^lX^Gji. OR SID NUMBER:
-«--*- A A r*- *• ^ j
STEPHANIE LUTE
Notary Public, State of Texas
My Commission Expires
03/03/2018
Notary without Bond