CAUSE NO, 03-15-0Q105-CR 

JUSTIN MURPHY § IN THE THIRD COURT 

VS. § OF APPEALS 

T HE STATE OF TEXAS § TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS 

MOTION REMAND TO TRIAL COURT FOR FURTHER EVIDENTIARY HEARINGS 

AND REVIEW THE RECORD IN (CARET JOHNSON 03-13-00726) IN 

CONSIDERATION OF THIS MOTION, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO DISMISS THE 

APPEAL 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: 

NOW COMES Justin Murphy, Defendant, by and though his attorney of record, Adam 

Reposa, and moves this Court to remand this case back to the trial court for further evidentiary 

hearings and in support of which would show: 

1. Defendant was arrested on 2013 for the offense of DWI 2"^ 

2. Defendant filed a writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. A 

hearing was conducted on 05/10/2014. At the hearing it was stipulated that 

Applicant had a subsequent diagnosis of narcolepsy. The only disputed fact was 

whether Applicant informed his previous Counsel that he had a history of falling 

asleep unpredictably. 

3. On May 23, 2015 the trial court entered written findings of fact. 

4. The trial court made a finding that Applicant Murphy was less than credible in his 

assertion that he told his previous counsel about his unpredictable sleeping behavior. 

The trial court made also made a finding that his previous counsel was credible. 

5. At some time months after the hearing (6/11/14), Applicant Murphy's previous 

counsel forged a client signature on a jury waiver without the client's permission. 

This information was not available at the time of the hearing for the obvious reason it 

had yet to occur. A hearing was held on in front of the Hon. Wilford Flowers. At 

that time the trial court made an inquiry about whether the Defendant in that case 

wanted to waive his right to trial but no inquiry about the propriety of a lawyer 

forging a client's signature was ever made. 

6. There is no evidence in the record to overturn the credibility finding of the trial court 

on appeal and the only way for Applicant to prosecute his writ would be to establish 

more evidence regarding credibility in the trial court. A lawyer trying to sign a jury 

waiver for a client in a manner intended to create the impression that the client 

themselves signed the document is evidence of dishonesty. Evidence of dishonesty is 

relevant to credibility determinations. 

7. The same attorney is the subject of a separate writ pending on appeal in this Third 

Court of Appeals. Garet Johnson 03-13-00726. (Motion for Rehearing En Banc filed 

2015 and is still pending) The issue in that case was the Applicant testified that he 

was intentionally lied to by his previous Counsel. Specifically he testified that he was 

told he was required to plead guilty to a DWI charge when in fact it was never part of 

the State's plea bargain offer. Garet Johnson's testimony was never admitted as 

evidence in the hearing for Applicant Murphy. 

8. Further the statement of Michael Bahr is attached as exhibits. 

ACCEPTED

03-15-00105-CR

7601953

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

10/29/2015 2:53:02 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 10/29/2015 2:53:02 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
Wherefore, Defendant prays that the case be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings 

or in the alternative be dismissed as Counsel for Applicant Murphy has read the record and 

without further evidence there is no basis for appeal. 

Respectfully submitted. 

lam 1 /i^jng Blackwell Reposa 

SBN 24040163 

1106 San Antonio St 

Austin, Texas 78701 

(512) 476-7376 Tel. 

(512) 478-1114 Fax 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVIC E 

This is to certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing on all parties, or their attorneys of 

record, in compliance with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, this.^v_day 

o^^^h^^. 2015, by hand delivery. 

Adam T. King Blackwell Reposa 

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE 

This is to certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing on the Travis CA and conferred 

wither about this motion. The TCA agrees / objects to our motion^ 

JAdam T. King Blackwell Reposa 
CASE: 

STATE OF TEXAS § 

§ 

COUNTY OF TRAVIS § 

AFFIDAVIT 

Before me, the undersigned authority, on this day, personally appeared Miguel 

Hernandez who, being by me duly sworn, states the following: 

I hired Sandra Ritz to represent me on my DWI 1^' case. She contacted me about my offer by 

phone one afternoon. I said it sounded like a good deal but I didn't know any terms or if there 

was any other option. I asked her if I needed to come to her office to go over the deal and she 

said no and that it wasn't necessary for me to take the day off for court. I wanted a second 

opinion and 1 contact Mr Reposa's office. 1 met with Mr Reposa on June 11"^. 2014, on June 12^^. 

2014 I appeared in court with Mr Reposa and Ms Ritz was there and had signed a Plea 

Agreement with my signature that I never agreed to . 

I HAV E REA D THIS STATEMEN T CONSISTING OF 1 PAGE(S) EAC H OF WHICH BEAR S M Y 

SIGNATURE, AND I SWEAR/AFFIRM THA T AL L OF TH E FACTS AND STATEMENTS 

CONTAINED THEREI N AR E TRU E AND CORRECT . 

Affiant 

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFOR E ME 

certify which witness my hand and seal of office. 

DAY OF ,2015 to 

MARIA 0ALDAZO RiZO 

^^'^vr----^ Matc h 01 , 201 6 

''I'jm' ' , - — 

NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF TEXAS 
Cause No. 

STATE OF TEXAS • 

v s 

• ^ 

COUNTY L A W NO.  COURT AT LAW NO. : 

TRAVIS COU-KTV, TEXA^' 

JURY WAIV£I^ 

I am the defendant (accused) in this case. I haye talked to my.tawyer about my ctise. '•.la open 

Court I make the foirowing voluntary statement: •' ' ' • 

^ I am the person charged. • . ' . ' * " 

a- I am mentally competent and I understand the natur.e of the charges a^aimitme. 

• I am aware that any^plea bargaining agreemenE amqng the State. p:iyself, and my 

attorney 15 not binding on"the court. . • • • 

» _ I understand that I have a fight to have a jury decide whether I am guilty and what my 

^punishmeaf should be, v/hether I plead giiilty, not gu.ilty, or nolo contendere. 

I have the right to beromjont.ed with the witnesses against itie. ' . 

• I have the riglit to remain silent. If ! choose to speak, anything I say can bs used 

against me, • _ • • . 

Kiiowing alF of the above, i give ijji tha fo.Uo^vmg right: 

The nght'of trial by jury. 

DATE 

DATE ATTOt 

DATE 

SIGNED THIS ^day of • ; 200_. 

JUdGE PRESIDRN^G 
NO. C1CR13213893 

STATE OF TEXAS § 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

IN THE COUNTY COURT 

vs. AT LAW NO. 5 

PABLO HERNANDEZ TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS 

MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: 

COMES NOW, Pablo Hernandez, DEFENDANT, through counsel, in the above styled-cause, 

and moves this court to grant the substitution of counsel for the following reasons: 

1. Defendant had retamed new counsel, Adam King Blackwell Reposa, to substitute for 

Sandra Ritz. 

2. Defendant wishes to be represented by Adam King Blackwell Reposa. 

3. Prosecution has offered an obstruction and Defendant would like Mr. Reposa to negotiate 

on Defendants behalf. 

3. Defendant has consented substitute of counsel. 

FOR THESE REASONS, Defendant prays Sandra Ritz be withdrawn as Counsel for Defendant 

and be substituted by Adam King Blackwell Reposa. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Law Office of Adam King Blackwell Reposa 

1108 San Antonio 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Tel: (512) 476-7376 

Fax: (512) 478-1114 

Sandra Ritz 

902 Rio Grande St. 

Austm, TX 78701 

Attorney for Defendant 

SBN 24040163 

Defendant