cc/fi1e: APRIL 15,2015 MR.JASON T. PEGUES #728196 HUNTSVILLE UNIT 815 12th STREET HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 77348

TO: COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS B0X 1.23.0.8- .r CAPITOL SIATION AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

# RECEIVED~N COOP«OFCfmfifNAtAPPEAlS 

## APR

## 20

# 2015 AbilAcost1,Clerk

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

DEAR CLERK ABEL ACOSTA, PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED AMOTION 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 ASUBSEQUENT 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-026185HC4



# -------------------------- 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 AVIOLATION 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 FFERENT 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 AREASONABLE 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 AREASONABLE 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 AFIRM 

### &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: AFUNDAMENTALLY 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 ARESULT 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 AWITNESS 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 77348cc/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-