COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS**P.O.~QX** 12308,CAPITOL STATION**~** ;

. AUSTIN,TEXAS 78711 IN THE SOVERELGNITY OF. THE COURT OF JUSTICE 

### ******* THE TEXAS COVRT OF**CR~MINAL** APPEALS
. 

### .---¥ IN RE THE STRAWMAN JAMES REBECTOR 

### iSS P MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE WRIT OF MANDAMUS

# RECE~VED**~f~** COURT**0~** 

### CRIMINAl APPEALS 

## APR 07 2015**~b®l** 

## Acosta, Clerk TO THE HONORABLE JUSTJCES OF THE tOURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS ENBANC: 1.

\

. The Re1ator seeks leave of This Honorable Cour,t o.f Justice To file Writ

.**~** . ' ''··- of Mandamus,and have such Mandamus Issue This Court of Justice's**Jur1idict~on**

..**~·** has been invoked by The Proper filing of The Article**11.0~,Writ** of Habeas

,. Corpus,with a Motion: To Vacate And Set Aside Entry Of Void Juagment properly ;attached**~n** The 144th 5udicial District Court of Bexar County,and**~nder** The "'·. .:..

### Aut~oriti of Metropolitain

### ~iansit**Aut~ority** v.Jackson 2L2 S.W:3d 797(Tex ..

## ·App-Hou~ton ( lstDIST.) 2006). MTAv .Jackson is controlling in t:h'i;ii rna

## tterbeca~se -·
..**~** the Judgment of conviction and. sentence is Yoid under ·Te'xas Law:. ,,· r The Writ of Habeas Corpus form serv_es as the VEHICLE by which the Motfon ·To Vacate and set Aside Entry of Void Judgment receives Proper Cognizance**b~fore** The Trial Court,which Retains Its Plenary Power Over**It~· Vo~d**  Judgment(s). \ Id. MTA v.Jackson 212 S.W.3d 797. For This reason the Habeas Corpus Proceeding

., is essentially transformed into a proceeding where1ri the Trial Cd'urt exercises !Jf!J exclusive PLENARY POWER TO VACATE THE ENTRY OF ITS:VOID JUDGMENT. An impromptu or arbitrary refusal to address the issue(s) as set forth is not
a discretionary matter,but a

### miriist~r~ duty as so established and settled \' under Texas**Law.~It** is**w~ll** settled that a Trial**~ourt** has not only Power, but a Duty To Vacate Entry of 

### a Void Judgment anytime,either during term,or after term,with or without motion;(And)Trial Court has no discretion to refuse to set aside Void Judgment,but has a duty to do so at anytime that**~uchmatter** is brought to its· attention." Id Metropolitain Transit Authority v.Jackson 212 S.W.3d 797 

### , 1·.•. This Honorable Court of Justice has · cons1stently held. that Void Judgments may always be collaterally attacked at anytime, Hoang v. State,872 S.W.2d**694~698~tex.Crim.App.l993;** ExParte Spaulding 687 S.W.2d at 745and for the
reason of a Void Judgment being made known To the Trial Court,Relator seeks Leave to**f~le** Writ of Mandamus,and for Mandamus To Issue in this Matter due To Trial Courts failure and refusal to respond. EXECUTED ON THIS 3rd DAY OF APRIL 2015. Sincerely

2.COUR":f OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS P.o:BOX**12308 CAPI~OL**  STATION AUSTIN 1TEXAS 78711

. ''r-.: IN THE SOVEREIGNITY OF-THE COURT OF JUSTICE 

### ******* 

## J. THE TEXAS COl]RT OF.>t.RIMINAL APPEALS IN RE THE STRAWMAN JAMES REBECTOR 

### relj' tWI

·' .·.**MOTION~~OR** ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS

# RECElVEDU~ tOURT OF**CBlMI~~.tAPPEALS ·~~·-'**  

# 1ft (j

## j 

## l!}h**A~** 

## Acosta, Clerk**~;** The**Re~~tor** was convicted in the l44th Judicial District Cburt of Bexar County**Puri~~nt** Texas**He~l~h** and Safety Code §481.112. prior to**Trja~~the** TrialCourt**·I~** •**~** J ; .::·;._.,,

### .. _ Judge ·ordered A _Psychiatric evaluation to determine the Inc<:)mpetency of the Relat6r1Pursuant Texas Code of Criminal Procedure,Article.46.02§2(a) (Prior To Its REPEAL in2004). As the Law applies to the FACTS ·of thiS:. ·case 1 The Trial
. Cou,rtPos'sessed a· ministerial duty to co.pduc;t, the**~ncompen~ency_** hearingLP_**ri~r** 

### , 'fht**/(ec~fl/l** t5

### c(~i/t)ld trf

### ~AJiA/t!.0/1-1/)e,/-efi/C~**n:4n~/'** to the**commen~ement** of the tria1. The Tr1al Court's**fa1lur~** to substant1ally
. c?·mply with Article 46. 02 § 2 (a) Whereby the ministerial duty is duly. noted by the**mand~tory** language-SHALL:Government Code § 3ll.bl6(2)- renders all Ytoceedin gs thereafter unequivoc'ally Void1rather than merely Voidable. 'For the foregoing Proprosition1The Relafor contends that the final Judgment and**it~** ..ensuing



### .. mandate sets forth that the Proceedings and ORDERS bF THE COURT COMPLY with 

### 0 REGULARITY and satisfy ·The**Presump~ion** Of' Correctness. As such there is an**inferenc~** that the trial Court" rendered Judgment against a incompetent indi v idual1 when .such de'terminat ion had not been made. Therefore 1 because the Trial Court failed t6.substantially comply with Article 46.02§2(a),Tex.C.Crim.

'**-:.~.** proc.**Aft~r** ordering the requisite Psychiatric evaluation1the final Judgment is effected and Void. As expressed1and Verified in Southern Insurance Company v.Brewster 249,S.W.3d 6,(Tex.App.-Houston[lst.DIST.] 200e7)

-., () "Wh.en a Trial Court renders judgment without Compliance with Section 410.258(a) 1 

## .fo_CAwtclh e..**~ttat~-terA** 

## 16 ct 

## {e_·!jal**1111.{./ll-kj~** 

## _ ' the Trial Court retains.**its~€lenary** Power to set it aside.'' The same principle is applic;4f,le in this matter1and must be stated as follows:"When a Trial Court renders judgment without Compliance with Article 46.02§2(a) the judgment is
a legal**null~~y."** 1.

' ..**··--·~-** _· ___**..:~,** ·-'

..

### 'Th~ Relator has



# . ; . 2.**Presented-t~~ Tri~l**  

### Cburt with the foregoing

.. ;lf.·il1·
. 

### issue of Void ':':{,!!,"'**c~niza'q~:e,** 

### in Judgment made The motion TSS:,vacate and Set Aside Entry of Void :t'· 

### judgment,by The

### VEHICL~**Pre~9ribed** as Writ of Habeas Corpus-Article 11 1 

### 07. The t r i a 1 court has fa i 

### l.ed , or r e fused

• ·

.• i**•!;.~**....... 

### to respond in any manner even 

# 1tle

# #rrufkal · after being presented with two

## notf6~s requesting

### Proc~§~9,8~0~-s~~ethed copy of the letter

r• '• 

### to the trial Court clerk

## ce~tl/ies the Relator's Du.e Diligence to obtain a ruling**"'~'/{** 

### ' '

-'·**,-:~r.·~·** 

### '
'I'''' 

### from the

### Tria~.Court.**i.r.b,'i~~** timely fashion.The Trial Court has abused

### it~ discretion _in failingto consider and rule the Properly cognizable motion. In Re 

### E@ 3'7 Eli 

### Hearn 137 S.W.3d)681 (Tex.App.San-Antonio 2004) it was held that: ;'When a Motion is

# prf~i{¥ filed and Pending before a Trial Court, The act of giving consideration to,.and ruling upon that motion is a**~inisterial,and** 

### Mandamus may issue to compel the Trial**judg~** 

### ·to act rd at 683-684,(Citing Safety-Kleen Corp v.Cearcia 945 · S.W.2d 268,269 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1997 original Proceeding). I'he Relator has made the requisite showing of bringing the matter to the Tria.l Court and the Trial Court's failure to respond or rule Barnes v.State 832 S.W.2d 424,426-427 (Tex.App.-Houston[lst DIST.]l992,original proceeding). 3. 

### For the reasons set forth above,The Relator requests this Honorable Court of Justic
e to Issue Mandamus Compelling the Trial Court to rule in accordance with Met'ropolitain
. .f'ransit Auth'ority v.Jackson 212 S.W.3d,797 specifically inlight of the Trial 'court's Plenary Power and to take cognizance of The Void Judgment Presented thereto. EXECUTED ON THIS 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2015 Respectfully requesting,

# ~~~f!U933**~TOR#896933** 

### ALFRED D.HUGHES UNIT,4Dll-04B ROUTE 2,BOX 4400 GATESVILLE,TEXAS 76597 (254)865-6663,UNIT WARDEN• • • ' ,., • ' ,; "!/**~-~** ,j\<J.",•**~\.** • . ..... ' 

### .

. ,. 

# !/{171-C-ll

# tdJ OJ/

# v

·- . /

. '. ( /