Thomas, Kenneth Dewayne ( 2015 )

AP-77,047 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS May 15, 2015 Transmitted 5/14/2015 7:41:14 PM Accepted 5/15/2015 7:52:05 AM ABEL ACOSTA NO. AP-77,047 CLERK KENNETH THOMAS () IN THE COURT OF () VS. () CRIMINAL APPEALS () THE STATE OF TEXAS () OF TEXAS MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: NOW COMES Appellant in the above-styled and numbered cause, and, pursuant to Rule 38.6 and Rule 10.5(b) Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, submits this Motion requesting that the Appellant be granted additional time in which to file the brief in the above-styled and numbered cause, and in support of same would show the Court the following: I. (a) Trial Court Designation: 194TH Judicial District Court Cause Number: F86-85539-M (b) Offense: Capital Murder Punishment: Death © Date of extension sought for June 19th, 2015 brief: (f) Number of prior extensions: 2 (g) Facts relied upon to support extension: Appellant’s counsel requests the additional time to complete this death penalty appellate brief. The brief is currently 85% completed. The testimony has been summarized for the initial draft of the brief. There is still required legal research needed to determine the issues that are viable for presentation. In particular this case presents unusual issues concerning a jury trial on competency that was conducted during the retrial of the punishment issues involved in this case and the case of Hall v. Florida was handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States concerning intellectual disability as applied in death penalty cases. This Supreme Court case affected the individual voir dire procedure and charge to the jury as a special issue of intellectual disability that was submitted to the jury. Appellant’s counsel is doing extensive research to present these issues concerning intellectual disability with the most up to date legal discussion possible in the brief for Appellant. Counsel has sought out additional legal research help on the intellectual disability issue and is expecting to receive that research in two weeks. Since the last request for extension, new writ counsel, Appellant counsel and State’s counsel have found and by trial court order unsealed 3 volumes of Reporter’s Record and have found an unnamed sealed motion that was denied by the trial court after verdict. Appellate counsel, writ and State’s counsel have agreed to unseal and review these items to see if these are relevant to direct appeal or post conviction writ. This appeal contains an unusually high number of voir dire and Batson issues. Additionally the competency jury trial has added to the issues and research needed to complete Appellant’s brief. Appellant’s counsel requests additional time to complete research of possible points of error and final draft of brief to be submitted on behalf of Appellant. Counsel has spoken to the State’s assistant district attorney, Ms. Christine Womble on May 14, 2015 and she has no objection to this limited extension of time to file Appellant’s brief. Counsel believes a final draft of Appellant’s brief will be filed within the time requested herein. II. The Appellant has been diligent in pursuing this appeal and is not seeking this extension for purposes of delay. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant prays that this Motion be granted. Respectfully submitted, /s/ John Tatum John Tatum 990 S. Sherman Street Richardson, Texas 70581 (972) 705-9200 Fax #: (972) 690-9901 State Bar No. 19672500 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of this Motion has been delivered to Susan Hawk, Dallas County District Attorney, or to her Assistant District Attorney in the Appellate Section assigned to this case, at 133 North Riverfront, 11th floor, Frank Crowley Criminal Courts Building, Dallas, Texas 75207, on this the 13th day of April 13, 2015. /s/ John Tatum John Tatum CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I certify that this submitted e-mail attachment to file Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief complies with the following requirements of the Court: 1. The petition is submitted by e-mail attachment; 2. The e-mail attachment is labeled with the following information: A. Case Name: Kenneth Thomas B. The Appellate Case Number: 77,047 C. The Type of Document: Motion to Extend Time D. Party for whom the document is being submitted: Appellant E. The Word Processing Software and Version Used to Prepare the Motion : Word Perfect X7 3. Copies have been sent to all parties associated with this case. /s/ John Tatum 5/14/15 (Signature of filing party and date) John Tatum (Printed name) John Tatum, Attorney at Law Emailed Copy of Motion