### IN THE TEXAS COURT OF

### CRIMINAL APPEALS 

### AUSTIN, TEXAS

EX 

### PARTE JUAN 

### RAUL NAVARRO-RAMIRF.Z,



### APPLICANT 

### Writ No. \ryR-71,401-01



### APPLICANT'S MOTION TO DECLARE HIS 

### INITIAL APPLICATION FOR

### WRIT OF 

### HABEAS CORPUS 

### TIMELY FILED AS 

### oF APRrL 18, 2007



### JEREMY SCI{EPERS 

### (No. 24084578) (Email :Jeremy.Schepers@ocw.texas.gov) ERIN ECKHOFF 

### (No. 24090910) (E-Mail : Erin.Eckhoff@ocw.texas. gov) Post-Conviction Attorneys 

### Office of Capital Writs 1700 

### N. Congress Ave., Suite 460 Austin, Texas 78701 (s12) 463-8600 

### (st2) 463-8s90 (fax) Attorneys for Applicant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) WR-71,401-01 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 7/24/2015 11:26:00 AM Accepted 7/24/2015 11:30:19 AM

ABEL ACOSTA CLERK

### IN THE TEXAS COURT OF 

### CRIMINAL APPEALS 

### AUSTIN, TEXAS

EX PARTE JUAN 

### RAUL NAVARRO-RAMIREZO



### APPLICANT 

### Writ No. 

### wR-71,401-01



### APPLICANT'S MOTION TO DECLARE HIS 

### INITIAL APPLICATION FOR

### WRIT OF 

### HABEAS CORPUS 

### TIMELY FILED AS 

### oF APRIL 18, 2007 Juan Raul Navarro-Ramirez 

### ("Ramirez"), 

### by and through 

### his attorneys, the 

### Office 

### of Capital

### Writs ("OCW"), respectfully requests 

### that

### this Court order his previously 

### filed 

### initial application to be considered 

### timelyfiled asof

### April 18,2007 

### Doing so

### will preserve Ramirez's 

### ability to pursue federal remedies 

### if this Court denies 

### relief on his 

### initial application. Further, 

### it prevents Ramirez 

### from suffering harm from his 

### prior counsel's failure to

### timely file his 

### initial application pursuant to the mandates of

### Article 1 I .07

### I of the Texas Code 

### of Criminal Procedure. 

### A. Statement of Facts Ramirez is confined under a sentence of death pursuant to thejudgment of the 370th 

### District Court, 

### Hidalgo County, Texas, case number CR-0551-04-G, which ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Iwas entered on December 

### 22,2004. (2 CR aT591-98.)' On direct appeal,this Court

granted relief on one count of Ramirez's conviction asviolating double jeopardy and affirmed thejudgment of a second count. Ramírez v. State,2007 

### WL 4375936 (Tex. 

### Crim. 

### App. Dec. 72,2007) (unpublished). The Supreme Court denied Ramirez's 

### petition for 

### writ of certiorari on October 

### 6,2008. Navarro-Ramirez 

### v. Texas,555 

### u.s. 831 (2008). The

### trial court appointed 

### David Sergi to represent Ramirez 

### in

### filing an 

### initial application

### for a

### writ of habeas corpus 

### on December 

### 22, 

### 2004. (2 CR 

### at 599.) Because 

### the State's 

### Answer 

### on direct appeal

### was f,rled 

### on December

### 4, 2006, Ramirez's 

### initial application was due on January 

### 18,2007. The

### trial court granted 

### Mr. Sergi three extensions 

### tofile, two ofwhich were not authorized under

### Article

1

### 1.071. Ex 

### parte Juan Raul 

### Navarro Ramirez, 

### No. AP-75,167 

### (Tex. Crim. App. 

### July

### 7,2008) (per curiam) 

### (unpublished). On 

### August 15, 2007, 

### after an 

### initial application was not 

### filed, the

### trial court held a hearing on Ramirez's pro se motion to remove 

### Mr. Sergi as

### writ counsel. 

### 1d. This request was granted by the

### trial court 

### "for reasons unrelated to 

### [Mr. Sergi's] failure totimely frle an

### application." 

### Id. This Court ordered 

### Mr. Sergi to

### file an 

### affidavit with reasons showing good causefor his 

### failure 

### to timely 

### file the 

### initial application. 

## Id. On 

### July 

### 7, 2008, having not yet received an 

### affidavit from 

### Mr. Sergi, 

### this Court found 

### him 

### in contempt. 

## Id. It
I ccçp:: refers to the

### Clerk's Record in Ramirez's 

### trial 2imposed a$500 fine, ordered him to return any attorney's feesthat were paidto him



### for work on Ramirez's case, and 

### forwarded

### a copy

### of the order

### to the Chief Disciplinary Officer atthe State Bar 

### of Texas. 

## Id. Onthe same date, Paul Mansur
was appointed to represent Ramirez andto 

### file an 

### initial application in the

### trial court 

### within 270 days. Id. 

### After receiving one ninety day extension, 

### Mr. Mansur

### filed Ramirez's 

### initial application on

### July 

### 9,

### 2009. The State's Answer 

### to that application was 

### filed on September 

### 7,2012. After 

### Mr. Mansur was unable to continue his representation 

### of Ramirez, the

### trial court appointed the Offrce of Capital Writs 

### ("OCW") to represent Ramirez in his state post-conviction 

### litigation on November 

### 9,2012. The

### trial court held a 

### live evidentiary hearing on November 

### 3 and

### 4, 2014, onthe issues raised in 

### the 

### initial application. On January 

### 20, 2015, 

### the

### trial court adopted 

### the State's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law verbatim and recommended that 

### relief be 

### denied. On February 

### 9,2015, Ramirez 

### filed objections to thosefindings 

### with this 

### Court. Ramirez's 

### initial application remains pending before this Court. 

### B. 

### Prior Counsel's 

### Actions Have Severely 

### Compromised Ramirez's 

### Abilify to Seek Federal Review 

### If this Court wereto deny 

### relief on Ramirez's 

### Initial Application, prior post

### conviction counsel's actions have 

### left Ramirez lessthan three months 

### in which to 

### file a

### petition seeking federal habeas corpus 

### relief. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act provides for federal habeas

### writ applications a one-year period 

### of
a -l

### limitation that runsfrom "the latest of the date on which thejudgrnent became final

by the conclusion of direct review or the date of the expiration of the time for seeking such 

### review." 28 U.S.C. 

### ç

### 2244(dXlXA). Federal 

### law also calls 

### for "a properly 

### filed application 

### for State post-conviction or other collateral review" to

### toll the time 

### limitation 

### to fìlefor federal habeas 

## relief. Id. at 

### (d)(2). Ramirez's one year 

### limitations period began on October 

### 6,2008, when the Supreme Court denied his petition for

### writ of certiorari on direct appeal. 

### It continuedto run 

### until July 9,2009, when 

### Mr. Mansur 

### filed Ramirez's 

### initial application, 

### which leaves Ramirez

### with only eighty-nine days in which tofìle his federal petition.2 

### C. 

### Ramirez's 

### lnitial Application Should be 

### Considered

### Timely Filed as

### of 

### April 18,2007 Ramirez, through nofault of his own, is at risk for losing over nine months 

### of time 

### for 

### filing his 

### petition in federal 

### court. This

### will significantly compromise and 

### limit his 

### ability to seekfederal review, particularly in 

### light of thevoluminous nature of the proceedings and

### filings during his state court proceedings. As outlined above, 

### Mr. Sergi failed to

### timely 

### file Ramirez's 

### initial application on

### April 18,

### 2007-rhe datethat it was due 

### following the granting of one ninety day extension, asauthorized 

### by statute. See

### Tpx. Coos Cruv. Pnoc. art. 11.071 $

### 4(b). Ramirez asks that his

2 Ramirez's federal counsel 

### will not have the entirety 

### of thistime

### towork on his 

### petition. A possibly signif,rcant amount oftime

### will be lost 

### until the federal district court actually appoints an attorney for Ramirez. 4subsequently f,rled 

### initial application be considered 

### timely 

### filed as

### of that 

### date. To

do otherwise would unfairly punish Ramirez forhis prior attorney's 

### actions-actions thatthis courl deemed worthy of acontempt order, fines, and repayment of attorney's fees
Respectfully submitted,



## DATED: July 

### 24,2015 By SCFIEPERS

5

### IN THE TEXAS COURT OF 

### CRIMINAL APPE,ALS AUSTINO 

### TEXAS



### Writ No. 

### wR-71,401-01 EX 

### PARTE JUAN 

### RAUL NAVARRO.RAMIREZ,

APPLICANT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 

### ORDER This Court grants this motion and orders that Ramirez's 

### initial application 

### for 

### writ of habeas corpus

### will be considered 

### timely filed asof

### April 18, 2007

ORDERED 

### AND SIGNED on

## this day of

### July,20l5

Judge

6

### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, declare and 

### certiff that 

### I have servedthe foregoingApplicant's Motion to Declare his 

### Initial Application for\Mrit of Habeas Corpus Timely Filed as of

### April 78,2007 upon: Court 

### of Criminal Appeals P.O. 

### Box 112308 Austin, Texas 

### 7871I (Original by e-File) Hidalgo County 

### District Attorney Ted Hake, Asst. Crim. 

### D.A. 100 

### N. Closner Blvd. 

### Edinburg,TX 78539 Juan Ramirez TDCJ 

### # 999490 TDCJ Polunsky 

### Unit 3872 

### FM 350 South Livingston, 

### TX 77351
This certification is executed onJuly

### 24,2015, atAustin, Texas. 

### I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing istrue and correct to the best of my knowledge.


### JEREMY SCHEPERS

7