Case ID: f-appx_265/html/0380-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ted Calvin COLE, now known as Jalil Abdul-Kabir, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Doug DRETKE, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, RespondentAppellee.
    No. 01-10646.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Feb. 15, 2008.
    Robert Charles Owen, Raoul Dieter Schonemann, Owen & Rountree, Austin, TX, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    Carla Elaina Eldred, Office of the Attorney General, Austin, TX, for Respondent Appellee.
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
   ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PER CURIAM:

This case returns to us on remand from the Supreme Court sub nom Jalil AbdulKabir, fka Ted Calvin Cole, Petitioner v. Nathaniel Quarterman, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, following the Court’s grant of a Writ of Certiorari to consider our affirmance of the district court’s denial of habeas relief. The Supreme Court reversed our judgment and remanded this case to us for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Court. Accordingly, we remand this case to the District Court for Northern District of Texas from whence it came, with instructions to grant habeas corpus relief to the Petitioner by reversing and vacating the sentence of death by lethal injection imposed and affirmed by the courts of the State of Texas and remanding this case to those courts with instruction to the State of Texas either to conduct a new punishment-phase trial within one hundred eighty (180) days following the federal district court’s remand or, in lieu thereof, to impose the appropriate prison sentence in light of the date on which the Petitioner committed his crime of conviction.

REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.