cc/fi1e: 

APRIL 15,2015 

MR.JASON T. PEGUES #728196 

HUNTSVILLE UNIT 

815 12th STREET 

HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 

77348 

TO: COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 

B 0 X 1.2 3.0.8- .r 

CAPITOL SIATION 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 

RECEIVED~N COOP« OF CfmfifNAt APPEAlS 

APR 20 2015 

Abil Acost1, Clerk 

Re: Ex parte JASON T. PEGUES/CAUSE No.94-DCR-026185 HC4(WR-74,762-05) 

DEAR CLERK ABEL ACOSTA, 

PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED A MOTION FOR REMAND TO CONDUCT FURTHER 

FINDINGS IN REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED CAUSE NUMBER. IF YOU 

WILL PLEASE PLACE THE ENCLOSED ON THE COURT DOCKET SO THAT IT MAY BE 

PRESENTED TO THE COURT AND TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AS THE COURT 

RULE ON THE APPLICANT'S APPLICATION. THANK YOU FOR@@YOUR TIME AND 

ASSISTANCE. . - ----------·---------

1 of 1 
£!~~~-!~~21=~£!=Q~&!~1-~£1 

~!=l1Ll&~=Q1 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

_§ 

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 

Ex Parte 

JASON TYRONE PEGUES 

§ 

§ 

§ 

APPLICANT'S MOTION FOR REMAND 

TO CONDUCT FURTHER FINDINGS ---------------------------

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: 

AT 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 

COMES NOW,l!~Q!_!~_f!QQ!~_ftl~~!2&, APPLICANT, pro-se, IN THE ABOVE 

STYLED & NUMBERED CAUSE OF ACTION RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THIS ~Q!!Q!_KQ~ 

REMAND TO CONDUCT. FURTHER FINDINGS UNDER Art.11.07 OF THE CODE OF ----------------------------------

.CRIMINAL PROCEDURE IN REFERENCE TO TRIAL COURT CAUSE No.94-DCR-026185 

HC4 (WR-74,762-05). THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO SHOW THIS HONORABLE 

COURT THE FOLLOWING: 

I. 

APPLICANT FILED A SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION 11.07 HABEAS CORPUS AROUND 

Q!£!~~!~_lQL1Ql1' IN WHICH THIS HONORABLE COURT DISMISSED THE 

APPLICATION ON MARCH 4,2015. THE APPliCANT RECEIVED THIS COURT'S ------------ ' 

RULING OF DISMISSAL ON ~!~f~_!lLlQ!1 AND ON ~!!f~_11L~Q!1 THE APPLICANT 

-1-
FILED A ''APPLICANT~S SUGGESTION PURSUANT TO RULES OF APPELLATE 

PROCEDURE,RULE 79.2(d) UNDER Art.11.07'' IN THIS HONQRABLE COURT. 

ON ~!~fE_1lL1Ql~ THE APPLICANT SUDDENINGLY RECEIVED FINDINGS & 

CONCLUSIONS FROM THE TRIAL COURT PERTAINTNG TO THE APPLICATION THIS 

DUE TO THE TRIAL COURT SUDDENINGLY PRESENTING FINDINGS ON AN 

APPLICATION THAT THIS HONORABLE COURT PREVIOUSLY DISMISSED, THE 

APPLICANT LOGICALLY ASSUMED THAT HIS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

PURSUANT TO RULE 79.2(d) OF THE RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE UNDER 

11.07 ESTABLISHING SEC.4(a)(1)(2) HAD BEEN GRANTED BY THIS HONORABLE 

COURT. THE APPLICANT RECEIVED THE NOTIFICATION CARD FROM THIS 

HONORABLE COURT THAT HIS APPLICATION WR-72,762-05 HAD .BEEN RECEIVED 

AND PRESENTED TO THE COURT FOR RULINGON !.K~.!!:_l~L1Q1~· THE APPLICANT 

IMMEDIATELY FILE THIS MOTION FOR REMAND TO CONDUCT FURTHER FINDINGS ON 

STATEMENT OF FACTS ------------------ WITH THE APPLICANT RECEIVING FINDINGS FROM THE TRIAL COURT, THE 

APPLICANT NOTICED THAT THE FINDINGS REGARDING CAUSE No.94-DCR-026185 HC4 -------------------------- WERE THE EXACT SAME FINDINGS· THE RESPONDENT FILED REGARDING THE INITIAL 

APPLICATION IN WHICH THE APPLICANT OBJECTED TO IN THAT PROCEEDING. 

FURTHERMORE, NEW EVIDENCE THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE WHEN THE INITTAL 

APPLICATION WAS FILED, ESTABLISHING SEC4(a)(1), REQUIRES NEW FINDINGS, 

AS WELL AS BUT FOR A VIOLATION OF THt UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION NO 

RATIONAL JUROR COULD HAVE. FOUND THE APPLICANT GUILTY BEYOND A 

REASONABLE DOUBT, ESTABLISHING SEC.4(a)(2). THIS NEW CREDIBLE, CRITICAL, 

CLEAR@,AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE WOULD HAVE CAUSED THIS CASE 1~1.!!,~ TO 

RESULT D I F FER EN T L Y • !~-.E.~!..!~-.!!~QQ!~L11_2._~..:.!:!..:.1!!__1.2,~£!.~~..:.£~.!~..:.!.K_K..:.1QQ.Z) ;, '·· . . . ,.,_ 

Ex Parte WHITESIDE,12 S.W.3d 819(TEX.CRIM.APP.2000). --------------------------------------------------

-2-
, I 

Q~QQ!~~-!Q~-~!~!!~_!Q_QQ!~QQ!_!Q~!~!~_!!!~!!Q~ 

I. --: 

THE SUBSTANCE OF THE TRIAL COURT'S FINDINGS CAME FROM THE TRIAL 

RECORD/TRANSCRIPT, AND IN THAT FACT, THE STATE DID NOT DIRECTLY 

ADDRESS THE CLAIMS & ISSUES PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT WHICH REGARDS 

TO THE INVESTIGATING PARTS OF THIS CASE 26185. THE TRIAL COURT HAS -----

PURPOSELY REVIEWED THE TRIAL RECORD AND DID NOT REVIEW THE INVESTIGATING --- --- ------ ARRESTING RECORD IN WHICH ONLY THE INV~STIGATING/ARRESTING RECtiRD CAN 

PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THE CLAIMS & ISSUES THE APPLICANT HAS 

PRESENTED. WITH THE TRIAL COUNSEL CARY M.FADEN BEING INEFFECTIVE 

FAILING TO PRESENT THESE PARTICULAR CLAIMS & ISSUES IN TRIAL, !~_£!E!~ 

~Q~~~~L~l1_~~~~1~_1l1_{!!!~£~!~~~ff~lQ1~); !~_£!E!~-~!11!~~-f~~~b!~ 

~!!!Q!LlQ11_!!!~f~!~~~ff~b!!!~_l2l_{!!!~f~!~~~ff~L~~Y-llLlQ11);!~_£!E!~ 

~QQ!~~L122-~~~~1~-~1~_{!!!~£~!~~!ff~lQ1l)," THE TRIAL RECORD DOES NOT 

HOLD ANY SUBSTANCE TO THE FINDINGS REGARDING THE INVESTIGATING/ 

ARRESTING PARTS OF THIS CASE 26185. THE TRIAL COURT FINDING IT'S FACTS 

ACCORDING TO THE TRIAL. RECORD~ IS IN PURPOSE BY THE STATE TO DERAIL THE 

COURT SO THE INVESTIGATING/~RREST!NG RECORD WOULD NOT BE REVIBED SINCE 

THE INVESTIGATING/ARRESTING RECORD CAN LITERALLY PROVE THE APPLICANT'S 

CLAIMS & ISSUES BEING PRESENTED, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. 

THIS HONORABLE CURT IS NOT BOUND BY THE TRIAL COURT FINDINGS, THE COURT 

SHOULD FOLLOW THEM WHERE THEY ARE SUPPORTED BY THE RECORD. !~_£!E!~ ~ "' . ~ 

Q~!~!!!,b._.b_!!L11·1~-{1l: A FINDING .OF FACT IS CLEARLY ERRONEOUS WHEN .. 

AL_THOUGH THERE IS .EVID.E_NC.E TO SUPPORT IT, THE REVIEWING COURT ~N THE 

ENTIRE EVIDENCE IS LEFT WITH A FIRM & DEFINITE CONVICTION THAT A 

' MISTAKE HAS BEEN COMMITTED., 

-3-
II. 

WITH THE DEFENSE COUNSEL CARY M.FADEN FAILING TO PRESENT THESE 

PARTICULAR CLAIMS & ISSUES (E~-E~E!~-~!11!!~_£E!~1E~-~E~!Q~L1Qll_!E~~ 

£~!~~!ff~1E~!~_l21_I!E~~£~!~~!ff~L~!!_~~L~Qll), AS WELL AS FAILED TO 

PRESENT THIS CREDIBLE, CRITICAL, CLAEAR, and CONVINCING EVIDENCE [THE 

INVESTIGATING/ARRESTING RECORD] (E~-E~E!~_gQ~!~~L~~2-~~~~l~-l~l-I!E~~ 

£~!~~!ff~1Ql~), THE SUBSTANCE OF THE STATE'S FINDINGS SHOULD ONLY 

COME FROM THE INVESTIGATING/ARRESTING RECORD ITSELF/ALONE. THE TRIAL 

RECORD WILL NOT HOLD ANY ELEMENTS OF THE CLAIMS &ISSUES THAT OCCURRED 

!!!Q~! THE ARREST IN THIS CASE ~~!~2, WHICH IS WHAT THE APPLICANT'S 

_APPLICATIONS (INITIALLY & SUBSEQUENTIAL) ARE PERTAINING TO AND IN WHICH 

HIS DEFENSE COUNSEL CARY M.FADEN DID NOT PRESENT & ARGUE, FOR IF HE 

WOULD HAVE, THIS CASE WOULD HAVE RESULTED DIFFERENTLY. Q~!!E~-~!!!E~-~~ 

!!Q1EY-~ll_Q~~~~~lL~l~_Il2~2); E~-E~E!~-~QQE~~Ll~2-~~~~l~-~2~_I!E!~ 

£~!~~!!!~~Ql~); E~-E~E!~-~£Q!!Ll2Q_~~~~l~-~l~_I!E~~£~!~~!!!~~QQ~). 

III. 

THE APPLICANT RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THIS MOTION FOR REMAND SO THAT THE 

TRIAL ~OURT CAN BASE IT'S FINDINGS AND IT'S SUBSTANCE ACCORDING TO THE 

INVESTIGATING/ARRESTING RECORD IN THIS CASE ~~!~2, AND DIRECTLY 

.ADDRESS THE APPLICANT'S CLAIMS & ISSUES. IN THIS HONORABLE COURT'S 

DECISION IN CmMPLETELY OVERRULING THE DeGarmo DOCTRINE AND IS TO BE 

APPLIED RETROACTIVELY (SEE:l!£Q!~Q~-~~-~!!!!Ll2~-~~~~l~_l22_I!E~~£~!~~ 

!ff~~Qll), COCHRAN,J.,CONCURRED STATING: ''OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 

MAKES TWO PROMISES TO CITIZENS: A FUNDAMENTALLY FAIR TRIAL AND AN 

ACCURATE RESULT. IF EITHER OF THOSE TWO PROMISES ARE NOT MET, THE 

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM ITSELF FALLS INTO DISREPUTE AND WILL 

EVENTUALLY BE DISREGARDED." (E~-E~E!~_!EQ~f~Q~Ll21-~~~~l~-~l~L~~l-I!E!~ 

£~l~~!K!~~QQ2). 

-4-
.. . . ' 

IF THE INVESTIGATING/ARRESTING RECORD IS REVIEWED TO ADJUDICATE THE 

MERITS OF THE APPLICANT'S CLAIMS IN WHCIH REGARDS TO THE INVESTIGATING 

PARTS OF THIS CASE I£1~~, THE REVIEWING COURT WILL NOT ONLY SEE THAT 

THE PROCEEDINGS LEADING TO TRIAL WAS NOT FAIR, BUT THAT THE TRIAL 

ITSELF WAS FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR, WHICH CONCLUDED TO A RESULT THAT WAS 

at III 451. 

!!g!!!~! __ !.Q! __ !!!!!!! 

PRAYER 

THE APPLICANT PRAYS THAT THIS HONORABLE COURT REMANDS THIS CASE & THE 

TRIAL COURT'S FINDINGS SO THAT THE TRIAL COURT CAN DIRECTLY ADDRESS 

THE APPLICANT'S CLAIMS BASED ON REVIEWING THE ONLY EVIDENCE WHICH IS -------- THE INVESTIGATING/ARRESTING RECORD IN THIS CASE I£1~~ THAT CAN SPEAK 

and PROVE THE FACTS AND TRUTH IN THE INVESTIGATING PARTS OF THIS CASE. 

THE TRIAL COUNSEL DID NOT SPEAK/PRESENT ANY ERRORS OR VIOLATIONS THAT 

TOOK PLACE BEFORE THE ARREST WHEN THE APPLICANT WAS ONLY A WITNESS IN 

TRIAL OR IN APPEAL, WHICH CONCLUDES THAT THE TRIAL RECORD/TRANSCRIPT 

DOES NOT HOLD ANY SUBSTANCE TO THE APPLICANT'S CLAIMS. PRAYERFULLY 

THIS HONORABLE COURT WILL GRANT THIS MOTION AND REMAND FOR FURTHER 

FINDINGS ACCORDING TO THE INVESTIGATING/ARRESTING RECORD SO THAT THE 

APPLICANT'S CLAIMS CAN BE FAIRLY REVIEWED AND IT'S MERITS FAIRLY 

ADJUDICATED. 

EXECUTED ON: 

YOU FORI YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. 

~~1'~7~~~~----------· 

-5-

1-h-t--~UBMITTED, 

~~--~ __ :li!SlJ-6 

#728196 

815 12th STREET 

HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 77348 
cc/file: 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE ------------------------

I,l!~Q!_!~_f!QQ!~_ftl~~!2~' THE APPLICANT, BEING PRESENTLY CONFINED IN 

WALKER COUNTY, TEXAS DO HEREiY AFFIRM THAt I HAVE DELIVERED THE 

ORIGINAL OF THIS 8MOTION FOR REMAND TO CONDUCT FURTHER FINDINCS TO THE 

PRISON MAILROOM OFFICIALS FOR DELIVERY TO THE FOLLOWING via U.S.POSTAL 

SERVICE: 

THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS CLERK,ABEL ACOSTA 

P.O. BOX 12308 CAPITOL STATION, 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 

PE~C~~ 

T. PEG 

#728196 

HUNTSVILLE UNIT 

815 12th STREET 

HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 77348 

INMATE DECLARATION -------------------

I,l!~Q!_!~_f!QQ!~_ftl~~!2~' PRESENTLY INCARCERATED IN WALKER COU~TY, 

TEXAS HEREBY DECLARE UNDER THE PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE ABOVE 

MENTIONED IN THIS MOTION FOR REMAND TO CONDUCT FURTHER FINDINGS IS 

TRUE AND CORRECT. 

SIGNED ON THIS 16 day of !!~!1,2015. 

FULLY, 

~?7-_"""": __ =?F __~~.t!i ES #728196 

HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 77348 

-6-