## 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

N O

. W R

- 8 5
, 7 9 5

- 0 1

E X P A R T E P A U L L A F A Y E T T E K I R K S E Y
, A p p l i c a n t

O N A P P L I C A T I O N F O R A W R I T O F H A B E A S C O R P U S

C A U S E N O

. C R 6 0 7 2

- B I N T H E 4 2 4 D I S T R I C T C O U R T T H

L L A N O C O U N T Y

J O H N S O N , J

. , f

i l e d a d i s s e n t i n g s t a t e m e n t i n w h i c h A L C A L A , J

. , j o i n e d

.

D I S S E N T I N G S T A T E M E N T

The parties ag ree that applicant is entitled to relief pursuant to Ex parte Lo

, 424 S.W .3d 10

(Tex. Crim. App. 2013), and the trial court fou n d t h at re l i ef should be g rante d. The fly in the

ointment is that applicant’ s sentenc e has been discharg ed. This Court’s long- held pos ition on the

availability of habea s relief when the actua l sentenc e has been discharg ed is to deny relief unless the

applicant has plead collater al conseque nces. The collater al conseque nces of a conviction as a sexual

offe nder are severe

, including l i m i t i n g wher e one may reside, what professions one may prac tice,

whether one may possess a fire arm, a

nd who one may

associate with.

This is not a case in which applicant asser ts that the trial court did not inform applicant about2

possible immigra tion conseque nces or about the possible conseque nces of being labeled a thief and,

there for e, a liar. The collater al conseque nces of a conviction for a sexual offe nse are not mere

possibili ties; they are set out in bla ck-le tter law. Among those clea r and cer tain conseque nces are :

being on a public list of sexual offe nders; having to repor t to the p o l i ce chang ing one’s place of

residenc e; being unable to spend time with one’s minor children; being unable to g o to theater s and

amusement parks beca

use of the prese nce of children; even being unable to attend churc h. Properly

war ned–or not–as to the co n s eq u ences of a conviction, when a conviction is nullified, clea rly the

conseque nces arising from that conviction should, nay must, be null i fi ed al s o

. I f there is no

conviction, no valid collater al conse quence s can a rise fr om it.

I n this application, applicant’ s counsel failed to plead collater al conseque nces, and the Court

there fore holds that applicant has failed to proper ly invoke this Court’s § 1 1 .07 jurisdiction. The

re s u l t is that applicant’ s writ is dismiss ed without prejudice

, but “without prejudice ” means t h at

applicant may leg ally file anothe r applica tion and raise the exis tence of collater al conseque nces in

that application.

Be cause such a subsequent application will not be barr ed by § 4, judicial economy sug g ests

that, in case s such as this one, which has clea r and cer tai n co n s equenc es, this Court should g rant

relief without requiring an applicant to d u p li c a te and supplement his prior application. Surely

, when 1

an applicant is clea

rly entit l ed t o re l ief and the collater al conseque nces are obvious and clea r, we

should not waste our limit ed resour ces on two revie ws when one will acc omplish the corr ect result.

S e x u a l o f

f e n s e s a r e p e r h a p s t h e o n l y c l a s s o f c r i m e s w i t h s u c h c l e a r a n d c e r t a i n c o l l a t e r a l c o n s e q u e n c e s

. T h i s 1

C o u r t c o u l d c h o o s e t o l i m i t g r a n t i n g r e l i e f w i t h o u t a p l e a d i n g o f c o l l a t e r a l c o n s e q u e n c e s t o t h a t c l a s s a n d a n y f u t u r e c l a s s

o f o f f e n s e t h a t h a s c l e a r a n d c e r t a i n c o n s e q u e n c e s t h a t a r e c o n t r o l l e d b y s t a t u t e s

.3

Filed: Nove mber 2, 2016 Do not publish