Vasquez, Richard

WR-59,201-03
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
AUSTIN, TEXAS
Transmitted 12/9/2015 3:59:44 PM
Accepted 12/9/2015 4:26:15 PM
IN THE 148TH DISTRICT COURT ABEL ACOSTA
CLERK
OF NUECES COUNTY, TEXAS
RECEIVED
AND COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
12/9/2015
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF ABEL
TEXAS ACOSTA, CLERK
IN AUSTIN, TEXAS
)
RICHARD VASQUEZ, JR. )
) WRIT NO. 59,201-03
)
APPLICANT. ) TRIAL COURT NO. 98-CR-0730-E
)
) CAPITAL CASE
)
) Scheduled Execution Date:
) April 23, 2015
)
)
APPLICANT RICHARD VASQUEZ JR.’S
RESPONSE TO THE STATE’S
MOTION TO LIFT STAY OF EXECUTION AND TO
DISMISS AS ABUSIVE SUBSEQUENT 11.071 APPLICATION
FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
On April 15, 2015, Applicant Richard Vasquez Jr. timely filed a subsequent
application for a writ of habeas corpus and a motion for stay of execution in this
Court and in the trial court. On April 20, 2015, the Court stayed Mr. Vasquez’s
scheduled execution pursuant to the application, and thus far has declined to grant
the State’s pending motion to dismiss. On November 17, 2015, the State filed a
motion asking the Court to lift the stay, and renewed its request that Mr. Vasquez’s
petition be dismissed.
The State makes no attempt to explain why dismissal is now warranted. As
Mr. Vasquez pointed out in his response to the State’s first motion to dismiss, Mr.
Vasquez’s application, which identifies new scientific evidence that belies the
State’s evidence offered against him at trial, is well-founded and warrants a
remand to the trial court for evidentiary development. Indeed, the State has
already conceded through silence that Mr. Vasquez’s application is not barred by
Section 5 of Article 11.071, that Mr. Vasquez now has access to admissible
scientific evidence that was not available to be offered at his trial, and that Mr.
Vasquez’s application states a claim for habeas relief under Ex parte Chabot.
Further, the State’s previous arguments regarding the evidence Mr. Vasquez
submitted with his application only show why remand to the trial court for factual
findings is necessary in this case. Lifting the stay here is plainly inappropriate.
Mr. Vasquez has a meritorious claim that warrants careful consideration in both
this Court and the trial court.
Accordingly, the State’s Motion to Lift Stay of Execution and to Dismiss as
Abusive Subsequent 11.071 Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus should be
denied.
Respectfully submitted,
EDISON, MCDOWELL & HETHERINGTON
LLP
2
By: /s/ Andrew M. Edison
Andrew M. Edison
Texas Bar No. 00790629
James M. Chambers
Texas Bar No. 24092240
Phoenix Tower
3200 Southwest Freeway, Suite 2100
Houston, Texas 77027
Telephone: (713) 337-5580
Facsimile: (713) 337-8850
andrew.edison@emhllp.com
james.chambers@emhllp.com
ATTORNEYS FOR RICHARD VASQUEZ, JR.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of this motion has been served on December 9,
2015, by email to the following:
Douglas K. Norman
Nueces County District Attorney’s Office
901 Leopard Street, Room 206
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
douglas.norman@nuecesco.com
douglas.norman@co.nueces.tx.us
/s/ Andrew M. Edison
Andrew M. Edison
3