Court Opinion

ID: 4049088
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-29 00:51:28.420055+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:01:49.294187
License: Public Domain

,/ . (\

” . .` - m 1 OIGE/~ OQ/

l/ Mr\'cari E. nunt/ TDCJ# 332307 -: '

,/ ~ 2661 FM ZOSZ+- H.H. COffl€ld U'nllt coRECE|vE-. |N
Tennessee Colony, TeXas 7588 uRTOFCHmmNALAPPEAua

(For Teleconference Appt., call (903) 928-2211) MAR 1a mms

 

, Ab°' Acosta,crerk

DATE PosTED; ‘%~w~§ y b

-rmrrnmdw@a§emMS%$Y§@éwMammawam£am&imealALQ;$;X;M,

 

...,`.`_,:‘_-_-.- -_: ~

RECOMMENDATION ton DISMISSAL by Judge non Adams, cr.§§§t?"tt. ~~"”
No.$\of Dallas County, Texas/ Writ-Cause No. W87-87937-I(B).

To wHoM ir MAY coNcERN= _
please find'en¢iosed my "wRiTTEN osJEcTioNs" to the friai court

Judge's RECOMMENDATION TO DlSMlSS my writ of habeas corpus wherein

l am seeking official interventions to reveal a miscarriage of Just-
ice that has harmed me in multifarious fashions for the past 27
years. Specifically, in 1987, Judge Larry W. Baraka, fabricated-
false evidence and conspired to deceive the Justices of the Texas
Fifth Court of Appeals to_illegally dismiss my direct appeal without

my effective permission, consent, knowledge, or authorization.

ln 201A, Dallas County District Clerk Gary Fitzsimmons, unwit-
tingly disclosed incriminating documentary evidences which proved
‘ that haag-a- rmy lvi."`i'izza»’r*a*\§
l . _ y _ MR. CARL E. HUNT, Applicant
(cc: interested parties) " TDCJ H.H. coffield Prison unit-T@XaS

lN THE TEXAS COURT OF CRlMlNAL APPEALS AT AUSTIN, TEXAS
AND lN THE

CRIMINAL DlSTRlCT COURT NO. 3, OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS

WRIT/ CAUSE NO- W87-87937-I(B)

 

 

 

 

,,.~~.._ ~ _` n 7 __ l ,.,_,.`,_ ,...~~.~,-_~,_,:_~`,.r.`~___,_....._»-
»~. .`..`.._.`,.,,:_..c~,...`,:,__ '----»---~_

CARL E. HUNT,
'(Applicant, Pro-se)

AfPLlCANT'S'WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE TRIAL COURTlS
FEBRUARY 12th,-2015 ARBITRARY AND VAGUE FINDINGS

COMES NOW, APPLICANT CARL E. HUNTasubmits these following

WRITTEN OJBECTIONS to the Findings of Criminal District Court NO.B.

 

Judge Don Adams, based upon the arbitrary and vague allegations of
the "laches doctrine." Such vague findings are tyrannical and not
based upon the actual facts and evidence thus far presented in this

~1,1_ State Writ Of Habeas Corpu-s that was filed pursuant to Texas Code U"_

Of Criminal Procedures Arti cle “11. 07 et seq seeking relief from a
harmful, VOID 1987-1988 Judgment; Conviction, and illegally abridged
Appeal Review perpetrated by the Trial Court Judge (etg.y Judge Larry
W. Baraka presiding in 1987- 1988 in Crim. Dist' Court No. ScDallas).
Applicant will show these Courts the following facts and grounds:

I.

"NEWLY nrscovERED EVIDENCE".EXCUSES THE LACHES DocTRrNE

 

 

Contrary to the Dallas County District Attorney and Judge Don
Adams contentions that the Applicant failed to file his claims for

over 26 years (see attached 2- paged 02/12/2015 RECOMMENDATfON TO

DISMISS ORDER issued by.Judge Adams), the evidence and facts bears

PAGE~ONE

out this baseless assertion of the "laches doctrine." Applicant will
demonstrate with irrefutable evidence, witnesses, and authentic trial
and appellate records that he only recently acquired proof from the
Dallas County District Clerk (Hon. Gary Fitzsimmons), when $101. OO

was~paid …for a copy of the trial records in Cause No. F87- 87937, to

,.,.._ MA, ,».` _.-`,. ,",...c~,»<, .'m.h,..,`.`,`_ m,`._,`,,`,` ,_ _ _ ,. __ l

establish that Judge Larry W. Baraka fabricated false appeal records

to deceive the Fifth Court of Appeals Justices. Such deception did
in fact succeed in getting the Applicant's direct appeal DISMISSED
by the Fifth Court of Appeals of Dallas, Texas, by falsely_alleging
the Applicant had WAIVED his right to appeal. No'written waiver, nn
court documents or transcripts, and no other form of proof existed
to substantiate this false waiver that Judge Baraka orchestrated.
District Clerk Gary Fitzsimmons unknowingly surrendered the relevant
falsified records in mid 201& when Applicant prepaid for the transj
cripts of the 1987 trial records. Thus, Applicant' s proof is based

upon "Newly Discovered Documentary Evidences' "which confirms Judge

as a "cut- out appeal attorney" and to create a paper trail that succ-

eeded in simulating a real appeal process. Applicant was not a part
Of this elaborate scheme and did not discover such until 2014.
ll§
APPLICANT'S RIGHTS OF APPEAL AND HABEAS CORPUS WERE ABRIDGED

DELIBERATELY BY THE TRIAL COURT_ AND INADVERTENTLY BY THE
FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS OF DALLAS, TEXAS

Applicant, a 60 year old Black American and U. S. Army Veteran,

has been harmed beyond any possible evaluation of a "harm analysis"

`by the state governmental entities who mishandled his 1987 cases.

PAGE Two

Only through the forum of an in- -camera Evidentiary Hearing, wherein
court-appointed counsel and court-appointed investigators participate
.in accordance with the United States Supreme Court s holding under

Martinez v. Ryan, 132 S.Ct.1309 (2012) ["an applicant has a const-

-ms~#_itutional"right to effective assistance of counsel on what amounts

 

,-,.»I.§_»~`h,_.~.,` .; _-#»_ ¢__.1_
,.,,-c.` -»-~W

 

MA::::,\;_ 'L,:‘.`,`~.~A,~',; »~.._ ,;,.,` ,`,-
,._.,`.-..,»\ M ,`M.-..M~._.»_,`

to his only chance to file a state habeas corpus petition based on
evidence that was not in the trial record.' ‘], will justice be served1
Applicant Carl E. Hunt has been consistently oppressed, imprisoned,
and denied the proof needed to establish that Judge Larry Ws Baraka
' Committed "aggravated perjury" when he devised a scheme to have Tina
Hollingsworth pretend to be the Applicant's appeal attorney, when in
fact the Applicant never made her acquintance,. never spoke to her,
.and never received any appellate brief filed on his behalf. Proof
now exists that no STATEMENT- -OF- FACTS were ever transcribed for use
to evaluate and draft a valid appeal brief, because Judge Baraka_and
Tina Holligsworth never intended to utilize. a Statement- -of- Factst
MCommondse nse and logic dictates that no type of appeal existed fort
the Fifth C ourt of Appeals Justice' s purviews or determinations*d'vn
Even the Applicant' s Cass County, Texas, attorney at the 1999
jury trial (enhanced with the VOID 1987 conviction) attempted to
`find out why the Applicant' s 1987- -1988 Appeal was unreasonably dis-
missed? Such efforts were alluded to in the 1990 trial and appell-
ate recordsm Only by virtue of District Clerk Gary Fitzsimmom's

Unintended/accidental/mistaken DlSCLOSURE OF THE FALSIFIED RECORDS

in 2014 did the true facts finally surface, The truth came to l ight.

 

The United States Department Justice is currently investigating
these matters under U. S. D. 0. J File NO. '19@5\¢5% " f ; Applicj

ant supplied copies of his writ and documents in 0ctober 2014 to them.

, `PAGE rates

lll.“
OBJECTIONS TO GOVERMENTAL DENlALShOF JUSTICE
Applicant Carl E. Hunt hereby objects to the fact that the Tex-
as government of Dallas County, Texas.(Judge Don Adams, former Dist-

M,r_ict _Attorney_ Craig Watkins, former Judge Larry W. Baraka (now in

A»~.,` ~ .._,`AM,..M

 

,`.-..,-`»-_._'_...,`_ _’;~.- ~.,.`. ,_ ...» ..`J_ ,_ M

 

11_,`_ __,,. ..M ..,._~_ _.~,_'.,..,,_.`,_.~ .` .~,; ,__,~ ',..,-`,_.

private practice in Denton, Texas), and numerous other unnamed trial

 

court officials are complicit in illegally suppressing the Applicant
in his plight to reveal the injustices he has suffered for 27 years.
Clear and convincing evidence [1n the form of the 12 Supporting EXHI-
BITS attached to his Art. 11. 07 et seq Writ of Habeas Corpus, plus-
more that are in the Applicant's possession] is presented which now
warrants an Evidentiary Hearing. Blacks in the United States have
been shamefully oppressed_and stereotyped by the criminal justice

v Systems, and there is no estimating how many other defendants were
abused by Judge Larry W. Baraka while he acted as the Presiding.
Judge of the Criminal District Court No. 3 of Dallas County, Texas.
,;flV,-

_:§i§&£:¢¢pw…i~¢,w;_~_"~

Applicant Carl E. Hunt shall continuously pray the the Texas
Court of Criminal Appeals intercedes to remand this case back to the l
trial court for further proceedings cmwisuym to due process and to
equal-protections of the law, based upon the standards of evidence.
Judge Don Adams is remiss in attempting to persuade the Court to act
Upon an inapplicable theory such as the ‘laches doctrine" to DlSMlSS
this meritorious case which involves "NEWLY DlSCOVERED EVlDENCE.'

So MovED AND PRAYED ton AND oBJ'tcTED To on this ct'\DAv oF mw…

/___

2015 A'D' g ’Respectfully submitted to all parties:

Csai t \\u¢t 2»@~\€
APPLICANT CARL E. HUNT, PrO-Se

PAGE FOUR

A,`~z..,..-.,_M._..`MM,_.:;TL.>:

 

TV\SL"\Q@A‘%'\\Q Y”Q~r \"\L'\"D§¢_\_v§-\.t 'IN F§`\’\`Q;Qg '€"\5, \\"C‘»`\ "I_%

 

 

 

'B\ZQL\»\_%Q 'T,

 

 

L\'\( \\ \<\9>'\ ‘\¥\/\cz_\d ‘T

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*m~;_A\M r/\q\ mm “r¢~\~@§ '\’\~m~.~¢&g md

v/\\\Q\\v\\ “1 '€\@Q'\ch\ \/\0\~2 `R~zc~ '

 

 

N({QA@<) \\\\ Q\‘C 3('\(\slv ‘P\QC¢:-\'A%

 

 

 

E)'w.

 

"` l \:`,`\Q- c> v»AQ¢ '¥0 \f>vcw w\<»\` Ca%z
o.>¢ww\\?\'e TO 'E;g ‘Tr\‘\,g V\M¥m \

`I' w` €-\\\ 01 >v`¥\v \.<\\>.\%

P\’c\-C><“ v~\ c\|<> proc>@. “”\`\\Z \2'\‘00¥* 'IS \"`¢~\

"`L \V\v>~a\.c<
\' '1`;“ ma w " P\\@a~ wqu

~r, §‘g,¢\<,\ Nv’\ §\U@»¢¢~\ N\)

n

~\ ‘¥`\'\Q ’\Z¢zc<,§<$§ '£ N '
F rank Crowley Courts Building ' -, ft
_ fizzz;it>faiysrtr@triziyd§rv.~12' ' ‘ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 5
Dallas, Texas 75207-430*0¢"' f fm w f w n v f w v m f f _ f f f f §

 

 

carr Hunr, #00_832'307
Coffield Unit

2661 Fl\/l 2054

T`ennessee flolony, TX 75884~

§'fi~‘l'i?i”i-'l~lillil-'i"'I`I"i.=ii?iil"ii“.=‘?l"i“'lii'i'*i'liii"§