AP-77,047

TMhDTMTM^, ,nDC, e COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS • a,,«t-hi -rr-^*r> AUSTIN, TEXAS

April H, 2015 Transmitted 4/13/2015 3:48:05 PM

Accepted 4/14/2015 10:26:09 AM

NO. AP-77,047 ABELAc?eSrk

ABEL ACOSTA, CLERK

KENNETH THOMAS () IN THE COURT OF

VS. () CRIMINAL APPEALS <t£/

0

THE STATE OF TEXAS () OF TEXAS

MOTION t FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF ^

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

NOW COMES Appellant in the above-styled and numbered cause, and,

pursuant to Rule 38.6 and Rule 10.5(b) Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure,

submits this Motion requesting that the Appellant be granted additional time

in which to file the brief in the above-styled and numbered cause, and in

support of same would show the Court the following:

I.

(a) Trial Court Designation: 194TM Judicial District Court

Cause Number: F86-85539-M

(b) Offense: Capital Murder

Punishment: Death

(c) Date of extension sought for May 29th, 2015

brief:

(f) Number of prior extensions: 1

(g) Facts relied upon to support extension:

Appellant's counsel requests the additional time to complete this death

penalty appellate brief. The brief is currently 75% completed. The testimony

has been summarized for the initial draft of the brief. All possible issues have

been identified. There is still required legal research needed to determine the
issues that are viable for presentation. In particular this case presents unusual

issues concerning a jury trial on competency that was conducted during the

retrial of the punishment issues involved in this case and the case of Hall v.

Florida was handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States

concerning intellectual disability as applied in death penalty cases. This

Supreme Court case affected the individual voir dire procedure and charge to

the jury as a special issue of intellectual disability that was submitted to the

jury. Appellant's counsel is doing extensive research to present these issues

concerning intellectual disability with the most up to date legal discussion

possible in the brief for Appellant. Appellant's counsel requests additional

time to complete research of possible points of error and final draft of brief to

be submitted on behalf of Appellant. Counsel has spoken to the State's

assistant district attorney, Ms. Christine Womble and she has no objection to

this extension of time. Counsel does not believe any additional time past that

requested herein will be necessary to complete Appellant's brief for filing.

II.

The Appellant has been diligent in pursuing this appeal and is not

seeking this extension for purposes of delay.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant prays that this

Motion be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

/si John Tatum

John Tatum

990 S. Sherman Street

Richardson, Texas 70581

(972) 705-9200

Fax #: (972) 690-9901

State Bar No. 19672500

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of this Motion has been delivered to Susan

Hawk, Dallas County DistrictAttorney, or to her Assistant DistrictAttorney in

the Appellate Section assigned to this case, at 133 North Riverfront, 11th

floor, Frank Crowley Criminal Courts Building, Dallas, Texas 75207, on this

the 13th day of April 13,2015.

/s/ John Tatum

John Tatum
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Icertify that this submitted e-mail attachment to file Motion for Extension

of Time to File Brief complies with the following requirements of the Court:

1.The petition is submitted by e-mail attachment;

2. The e-mail attachment is labeled with the following information:

A. Case Name: Kenneth Thomas

B. The Appellate Case Number: 77,047

C. The Type of Document: Motion to Extend Time

D. Party for whom the document is being submitted: Appellant

E. The Word Processing Software and Version Used to Prepare the

Motion :

Word Perfect X7

3. Copies have been sent to all parties associated with this case.

/s/ John Tatum 4/13/15

(Signature of filing party and date)

John Tatum

(Printed name)

John Tatum, Attorney at Law

Emailed Copy of Motion