## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S

O F T E X A S

NO. WR-50, 358-02

EX P ART E JOHN GAB RI EL CAP E, Appl icant

ON AP P LI CAT I ON F OR A WRIT OF HAB EA S CORP US

CAUSE NO. 2017CR12157-W1 I N THE 226TH DI STRI CT COURT

F ROM B EX AR COUNTY

P er cur iam

. Y E A R Y

, J.

, f

il ed a diss enti ng opin ion.

O P I N I O N

A ppl i can t pl eade d n o co n

t es t t o o n e co un

t o f po s s es s i o n o f a co n

t ro l l ed s ub s t an ce, a

n d was

s en t en ced t o t en y ears ’ i

m pri s o n m en t

. He di d n o t appea l h i s co n v i ct i o n

. A

ppl i cant f i l e d t h i s

appl i cat i o n f

o r a wr i t o f h ab eas co rpus i

n t h e co un

t y o f co n v i ct i o n

, an d t h e di s t ri ct cl erk f o rwarded

i t t o t h i s Co urt

. See T E X

. C O D E C R I M

. P R O C

. art

. 11. 07.

A ppl i can t and t w o co -def

en dan t s were arr es t ed af

t er l aw en f

o rcem en t ex ecut ed a s earch

warran t at a resi den ce wh ere A ppl i can t l i v ed an d drugs w e r e f

o u nd

. T h e s earch was b as ed o n

i n f o rm at i o n s uppl i ed b y a co n f i den t i al i n f o rm an t

. A ppl i can t an d h i s co -def

en dan t s m ai n t ai n ed t h at t h e

perso n wh o t h ey b el i ev ed t o b e t h e co n f i den t i al i n f o rm an t pl an t ed t h e dr ugs j us t b ef

o re t h e sea

rch

.

J us t b ef o re l aw en f

o rcem en t arr i v ed, an i n di v i dual cam

e t o t h e h o us e wi

t h h i s ch i l d. He as ked t o us e2

t h e rest ro o m an d l ef

t a s h o rt t i m e l at er. Duri

n g t h e s earch t h at l aw en f

o rcem en t co n duct ed l at er t h at

day

, a l arge quan

t i t y o f n arco t i cs was di s co v ered i n a l o o s e b o ard i

n t h e b at h ro o m as wel l as o ut s i de

o n t h e f ro n t po rch

. Sm al l er quan

t i t i es o f drugs an d paraph ern al i a were al s o f o un d aro un d t h e h o us e

an d i n o n e co -def

en dan t ' s purse.

A ppro x i m at el y t wo y ears af

t er A ppl i can t pl eade d n o co n

t es t t o t h e ch arges

, t h e St at e l earn ed

t h at t h e co n f

i den t i al i n f o rm an t wh o pro v i ded t h e i

n f o rm at i o n rel i ed o n f

o r a s earch warran

t i n t h i s

cas e i s un rel i ab l e an d pl an

t ed ev i den ce i

n a h o us e i

n an un rel at ed cas e. T h e St at e pro m pt l y di s cl o s ed

t h i s f act t o A ppl i can t

.

A ppl i can t n o w co n t en ds t h at t h e St at e co m

m i t t ed a B r ady v i o l at i o n

, t h at h e was den i ed due

pro ces s b eca

us e t h e St at e rel i ed o n f

a l s e e v i den ce, t h at h i s pl ea was i n v o l un t ary

, an d t h at h e i s

a c t u a l l y i n n o cen t

. T h i s Co urt rem an ded t h i s m at t er t o t h e t ri al co urt t o o b t ai n f i n di n gs o f f act and

co n cl us i o n s o f l aw addres s i

n g A ppl i can t ’ s act ual i

n n o cen ce cl ai

m

. Speci f i cal l y

, t h i s Co urt as ked f

o r

f i n di n gs as t o wh et h er A

ppl i can t po s s es s ed quan

t i t i es o f m et h am

ph et am i n e t h at were n o t part o f t h e

drugs al l egedl

y pl an t ed b y t h e co n f

i den t i al i n f o rm an t i n t h i s cas e, an d i f s o

, wh et he r Ap p l i can t

co m m i t t ed a l es s er- i

n cl uded o f f en s e o f t h e ch arges s et o ut i n t h e i n di ct m en t an d wh et h er h e h as

es t ab l i s h ed t h at h e i s act ual l y i n n o cen t

. See State v. W

ilson

, 324 S. W

. 3d 595, 598 (T ex

. Cri m

. A pp.

2010) ( " We h o l d t h at t h e t erm ‘ act ual i n n o cen ce' s h al l appl

y

, i n T ex as s t at e cas es

, o n l y i n

ci r c u m s t a nces i

n wh i ch an acc us ed di d n o t

, i n f act

, co m m i t t h e ch arged o f

f en s e o r an

y o f t h e

l es s er- i n cl uded o f f en s es

. ").

T h e t ri al co urt h el d a h ab eas h eari n g at wh i ch i

t h eard argum en

t s f ro m t h e part i es

. A s i

t di d

b ef o re rem an d, t h e t ri al co urt reco m m en ds t h at rel i ef b e gran

t ed o n t h e b as i s o f a c t u a l i n n o cen ce,

b eca us e b ut f o r t h e f al s e i n f o rm at i o n pro v i ded b y t h e co n f i den t i al i n f o rm an t

, t h e St at e wo ul d n o t h av e3

b een ab l e t o co n duct a v al i d s earch

, an d wo ul d n o t h av e b ro ugh t an y ch arges at al l

. W e di s agree.

A l t h o ugh t h e “ n ewl

y -di s co v ered” ev i den ce do es cas t do ub t o n t h e v al i di t y o f t h e s earch warran

t

, an d

do es s uppo rt A

ppl i can t ’ s cl ai m t h at t h e co n f

i den t i al i n f o rm an t pl an t ed t h e dr ugs t h at were f

o un d i n

t h e b at h ro o m an d i

n a b an k b ag f o un d o ut s i de t h e h o us e, A ppl i can t h as n o t dem

o n s t rat ed t h at h e di d

n o t co m m i t a l es s er- i n cl uded o f f en s e b y po s s es s i

n g t h e drugs n o t al l eged t o h av e b een pl an t ed b y t h e

co n f i den t i al i n f o rm an t

. T h eref o re, h e do es n o t qual i f

y f o r rel i ef o n t h e b as i s o f act ual i n n o cen ce.

No r h as A ppl i can t dem o n s t rat ed t h at t h e St at e co m m i t t ed a B r ady v i o l at i o n

, b eca

us e t h e St at e

di s cl o s ed t h e i

n f o rm at i o n ab o ut t h e un

rel i ab i l i t y o f t h e co n f

i den t i al i n f o rm an t t o A ppl i can t as s o o n

as i t cam e t o l i gh t

, wh i ch was af

t er h i s pl ea. A

ppl i can t h as n o t dem

o n s t rat ed t h at h i s co n

v i ct i o n was

b as ed o n f al s e t es t i m o n y

, b eca us e h e pl eade d n o co n

t es t t o t h e ch arges

, an d t h e St at e di d n o t prese n t

t es t i m o n y f ro m t h e co n f

i den t i al i n f o rm an t

.

Ho wev er, t h e t ri al co urt ’ s reco m m en dat i o n t o gran

t rel i ef o n t h e b as i s o f an i

n v o l un t ary pl ea

i s s uppo rt ed b y t h e reco rd. If A p p l i c a nt h ad b een awa

re t h at t h e i

n f o rm at i o n pro v i ded b y t h e

co n f i den t i al i n f o rm an t us ed t o o b t ai

n t h e s earch warran

t t h at l ed t o t h e di s co v ery o f t h e dr ugs was

un rel i ab l e, i t i s l i kel y t h at h e wo ul d n o t h av e pl eade d n o co n t es t t o t h e ch arges

, bu t w o u l d hav e

ch al l en ged t h e v al i di

t y o f t h e s earch

. Such a ch al l en ge wo ul d l i kel y h av e b een s ucce s s f

ul

, an d wo ul d

l i kel y h av e l ed t o a di s m

i s s al o f t h e ch arges

.

Re l i ef i s gran

t ed. B r ady v. United States

, 397 U.S

. 742 (1970)

. T he j u d g m e nt i n caus e

n um b er 20 1 7 C R 1 2 1 5 7 i

n t h e 226t h Di s t ri ct Co urt o f Be x ar Co un t y i s s et as i de, an d A

ppl i can t i s

rem an ded t o t h e cus t o dy o f t h e Sh eri f f o f Be x ar Co un

t y t o an s wer t h e ch arges as s et o ut i n t h e

i n di ct m en t

. T h e t ri al co urt s h al l i s s ue an y n ece s s ary b en ch warran t wi t h i n t en day s f

ro m t h e dat e o f

t h i s Co urt ’ s m an dat e.4

Co pi es o f t h i s o pi

n i o n s h al l b e s en

t t o t h e T ex as Depa

rt m en t o f Cri m i n al J us t i ce–C o rr ect i o n al

In s t i t ut i o n s Di v i s i o n an d t h e Bo ard o f Pardo n s an d Paro l es

.

Del i v ered: J un e 30, 2021

Do n o t pub l i s h