Court Opinion

ID: 4046411
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-29 00:08:53.397137+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:30:30.457151
License: Public Domain

ACCEPTED
                                                                                                                                                                                    04-15-00456-CR
                                                                                                                                                                        FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS
                                                                                                                                                                             SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
                                                                                                                                                                              10/14/2015 2:34:44 PM
                                                                                                                                                                                     KEITH HOTTLE
                                                                                                                                                                                             CLERK

                                                           NO.	
  	
  04-­‐15-­‐00456-­‐CR	
  
                                                                             	
  
                                                   IN	
  THE	
  COURT	
  OF	
  APPEALS	
              FILED IN
                                                                                               4th COURT OF APPEALS
                                          FOURTH	
  COURT	
  OF	
  APPEALS	
  DISTRICT	
   SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
                                                         SAN	
  ANTONIO,	
  TEXAS	
            10/14/15 2:34:44 PM
                                                                                                 KEITH E. HOTTLE   	
  
                                                                                                       Clerk
                                                                             	
  
                                                                JAMES	
  GARZA.	
  
                                                                             	
  
                                                                  Appellant	
  
                                                                             	
  
                                                                            V.	
  
                                                                             	
  
                                                        THE	
  STATE	
  OF	
  TEXAS,	
  
                                                                             	
  
                                                                      Appellee	
  
                                                                                                                   	
  
                                                                             	
  
                                   ON	
  APPEAL	
  FROM	
  THE	
  290th	
  DISTRICT	
  COURT	
  
                                                    OF	
  BEXAR	
  COUNTY	
  TEXAS	
  
                                            CAUSE	
  NUMBER	
  2009-­‐CR-­‐12648A
                                                                                                                   	
  
                                                                             	
  
                                                   BRIEF	
  FOR	
  THE	
  APPELLANT	
  
	
            	
            	
       	
       	
           	
          	
          	
  
	
  
	
            	
            	
               	
            	
            	
            	
                                             EDWARD	
  F.	
  SHAUGHNESSY	
  
                                      	
            	
            	
                      	
                              	
  	
  	
  206	
  E.	
  Locust	
  Street	
  
	
            	
            	
               	
            	
            	
                            	
                             San	
  Antonio,	
  Texas	
  78212	
  
	
            	
            	
               	
            	
            	
                            	
                             (210)	
  212-­‐6700	
  
	
            	
            	
               	
            	
            	
                            	
                             (210)	
  212-­‐2178	
  (FAX)	
  
	
            	
            	
               	
            	
            	
                            	
                             Shaughnessy727@gmail.com	
  
	
            	
            	
               	
            	
            	
                            	
                             SBN	
  18134500	
  
                                                                                                                                      	
  	
  	
  
                                                                                	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
                            	
   	
  	
  
       	
  
ORAL	
  ARGUMENT	
  REQUESTED	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
          ATTORNEY	
  FOR	
  APPELLANT	
  
                                                                                                     	
  
TABLE	
  OF	
  CONTENTS	
  
	
  
Table of Contents ..................................................................................................... ii

Table of Interested Parties ...................................................................................... iii

Table of Authorities..................................................................................................iv

Brief for the Appellant .............................................................................................. v

Summary of the Argument ...................................................................................... 6

Argument and Authorities ....................................................................................... 9

Conclusion and Prayer ............................................................................................10

Certificate of Service ............................................................................................... 12

Certificate of Compliance…………………………………………………………………………....12
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  

                                                            ii
                                                                                                                                                      PARTIES	
  AND	
  COUNSEL	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
TRIAL	
  COUNSEL	
  FOR	
  THE	
  STATE:	
  
	
  
WENDY	
  WILSON	
  
Assistant	
  Criminal	
  District	
  Attorney	
  
Bexar	
  County,	
  Texas	
  
401	
  W.	
  Nueva	
  
San	
  Antonio,	
  Texas	
  78205	
  
	
  
TRIAL	
  COUNSEL	
  FOR	
  APPELLANT:	
  
	
  
EDWARD	
  F.	
  SHAUGHNESSY,	
  III	
  
206	
  E.	
  Locust	
  
San	
  Antonio,	
  Texas	
  78212	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
	
  
	
  
APPELLANT’S	
  ATTORNEY	
  ON	
  APPEAL:	
  
	
  
EDWARD	
  F.	
  SHAUGHNESSY,	
  III	
                                                                                                                                         	
                                             	
                                             	
  
206	
  E.	
  Locust	
  Street	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
San	
  Antonio,	
  Texas	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
(210)212-­‐6700	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
(210)	
  212-­‐2178	
  Fax	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
SBN	
  18134500	
  
	
  
	
  
TRIAL	
  JUDGE:	
  
	
  
MELISA	
  SKINNER	
  
290th	
  Judicial	
  District	
  
Bexar	
  County,	
  Texas	
  
                                                                                                                                                                                                      	
  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    iii
                                                         	
  
                                         TABLE	
  OF	
  AUTHORITIES	
  
	
  
	
  
Cases	
  
	
  
Bear	
  Cloud	
  v.	
  State,	
  334	
  P.3d	
  132	
  (Wyoming	
  2014)………………………………..……..10	
  

Eddings	
  v.	
  Oklahoma,	
  102	
  S.	
  Ct.	
  869	
  (1987)………………………………………....………10	
  

Miller	
  v.	
  Alabama,	
  _____	
  U.S._____,	
  132	
  S.	
  Ct.	
  2455	
  (2012)…………..………....7,	
  8,	
  9,	
  10	
  

State	
  v.	
  Dull,	
  351	
  P.2d	
  641	
  (Kansas	
  2015)…………………………………………………….10	
  
	
  
State	
  v.	
  Lyle,	
  854	
  N.W.2d	
  378	
  (Iowa	
  2014)………………………………………………...…10

                                                           iv
                                           NO.	
  04-­‐15-­‐00456-­‐CR	
  
                                                          	
  
	
  
	
  
JAMES	
  GARZA,	
   	
            	
     §	
     COURT	
  OF	
  APPEALS,	
  FOURTH	
  
	
  
	
  	
   Appellant	
   	
         	
     §	
  
	
  
V.	
     	
      	
     	
        	
     §	
     COURT	
  OF	
  APPEALS	
  DISTRICT	
  
	
  
THE	
  STATE	
  OF	
  TEXAS,	
   	
      §	
  
	
  
	
  	
   Appellee	
   	
          	
     §	
     SAN	
  ANTONIO,	
  TEXAS	
  
	
  
	
  
                               BRIEF	
  FOR	
  THE	
  APPELLANT	
  
                                                 	
  
TO	
  THE	
  HONORABLE	
  COURT	
  OF	
  APPEALS:	
  
	
  	
  
	
       Now	
  comes	
  the	
  appellant,	
  James	
  Garza	
  and	
  files	
  this	
  brief	
  in	
  Cause	
  

No.	
   04-­‐14-­‐00456-­‐CR.	
   	
   The	
   appellant	
   appeals	
   from	
   a	
   judgment	
   of	
   the	
  

290th	
  District	
  Court	
  of	
  Bexar	
  County,	
  Texas.	
  

	
        The	
   appellant	
   was	
   indicted	
   by	
   a	
   Bexar	
   County	
   grand	
   jury	
   for	
   the	
  

offense	
  of	
  Capital	
  Murder	
  on	
  December	
  16,	
  2009.	
  	
  He	
  was	
  subsequently	
  

convicted	
   by	
   a	
   jury	
   and	
   sentenced	
   to	
   Life,	
   without	
   the	
   possibility	
   of	
  

parole,	
   in	
   the	
   Texas	
   Department	
   of	
   Criminal	
   Justice-­‐	
   Institutional	
  

Division.	
  	
  That	
  conviction	
  was	
  and	
  sentence	
  was	
  appealed	
  to	
  this	
  Court.	
  	
  

On	
   October	
   12,	
   2012,	
   this	
   Court	
   affirmed	
   the	
   judgment	
   of	
   the	
   trial	
   Court	
  

in	
   all	
   respects.	
   See:	
   Garza	
   v.	
   State,	
   (04-­‐22-­‐00891-­‐CR,	
   Tex.	
   App.-­‐San	
  

                                                            5
Antonio,	
   October	
   24,	
   2012)	
   (2012	
   WL	
   5236048).	
   	
   The	
   appellant	
  

subsequently	
   sought	
   and	
   obtained	
   a	
   Petition	
   for	
   Discretionary	
   Review	
  

to	
   the	
   Court	
   of	
   Criminal	
   Appeals.	
   	
   On	
   June	
   11,	
   2014,	
   that	
   Court	
   reversed	
  

the	
   judgment	
   of	
   this	
   Court	
   and	
   remanded	
   the	
   cause,	
   to	
   this	
   Court,	
   for	
  

further	
   proceedings.	
   	
   Garza	
   v.	
   State,	
   435	
   S.W.	
   3d	
   258	
   (Tex.	
   Crim.	
   App.	
  

2014).	
  

	
        This	
  Court	
  subsequently	
  reversed	
  and	
  remanded	
  the	
  cause	
  to	
  the	
  

trial	
  Court	
  for	
  purposes	
  of	
  resentencing.	
  	
  Garza	
   v.	
   State,	
   453	
   S.W.3d	
   548	
  

(Tex.	
  App.-­‐San	
  Antonio,	
  2014)	
  

	
        The	
   appellant	
   thereafter	
   appeared	
   in	
   the	
   290th	
   District	
   Court	
   for	
  

purposes	
   of	
   resentencing.	
   (C.R.-­‐179,	
   180,	
   181)	
   	
   Following	
   a	
   sentencing	
  

hearing	
   conducted,	
   before	
   the	
   trial	
   Court,	
   the	
   appellant	
   was	
   sentenced	
  

to	
   Life	
   in	
   the	
   Texas	
   Department	
   of	
   Criminal	
   Justice-­‐Institutional	
  

Division.	
  (S.C.R.-­‐3,	
  4)	
  	
  The	
  appellant	
  thereafter	
  filed	
  a	
  written	
  notice	
  of	
  

appeal	
  and	
  this	
  appeal	
  was	
  pursued.	
  (C.R.-­‐173)	
  

	
        	
  

	
                                        	
  

                                                              6
       	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  SUMMARY	
  OF	
  ARGUMENT	
  

       	
                     	
  
	
  
       	
                     The	
  trial	
  Court	
  erred	
  in	
  refusing	
  to	
  provide	
  the	
  appellant	
  a	
  

       sentencing	
  hearing	
  that	
  complied	
  with	
  the	
  dictates	
  of	
  the	
  United	
  States	
  

       Supreme	
  Court	
  set	
  forth	
  in	
  Miller	
  v.	
  Alabama,	
  _____	
  U.S._____,	
  132	
  S.Ct.	
  

       2455	
  (2012).	
  	
  

       	
                     	
                      	
                     	
  	
  	
  	
  

                                                                                                	
  
                                                                                                	
  
       	
                                                                   STATEMENT	
  OF	
  APPLICABLE	
  FACTS	
  

       	
                     Prior	
  to	
  the	
  sentencing	
  hearing,	
  ordered	
  by	
  this	
  Court	
  in	
  its	
  

       opinion	
  of	
  December	
  23,	
  2014,	
  the	
  appellant	
  caused	
  to	
  be	
  filed	
  a	
  written	
  

       Motion	
  fro	
  Appointment	
  of	
  an	
  Independent	
  Expert	
  Witness.	
  (C.R.-­‐167)	
  	
  

       That	
  motion	
  sought	
  two	
  species	
  of	
  relief	
  from	
  the	
  trial	
  Court	
  prior	
  to	
  the	
  

       “resentencing”	
  hearing	
  ordered	
  by	
  this	
  Court.	
  	
  It	
  sought	
  to	
  have	
  the	
  trial	
  

       Court	
  to	
  appoint	
  an	
  expert	
  witness	
  in	
  the	
  issue	
  of	
  “mitigation”.	
  	
  In	
  

       addition	
  the	
  motion	
  requested	
  that	
  the	
  “resentencing”	
  be	
  conducted	
  

       before	
  a	
  jury	
  and	
  that,	
  the	
  potential	
  range	
  be	
  that	
  of	
  a	
  traditional	
  first	
  

       degree	
  felony	
  	
  (Five	
  years	
  to	
  Life)1.	
  	
  (C.R.167	
  thru	
  170)	
  	
  On	
  the	
  date	
  the	
  

       1
        Prior to the onset of the trial the appellant had caused to be file a written Election of
       Punishment wherein he notified that he desired that a jury assess his punishment in the
                                                                                                                                                  7
case	
  was	
  called	
  for	
  the	
  “resentencing”,	
  that	
  motion	
  was	
  presented	
  to	
  the	
  

trial	
  Court.	
  	
  After	
  hearing	
  arguments	
  from	
  counsel,	
  the	
  trial	
  Court	
  

denied	
  the	
  relief	
  requested	
  in	
  the	
  motion.	
  (R.R.-­‐9)	
  

	
         The	
  trial	
  Court	
  then	
  proceeded	
  with	
  an	
  evidentiary	
  hearing	
  

limited	
  to	
  the	
  single	
  issue	
  of	
  whether	
  or	
  not	
  the	
  appellant	
  was	
  

seventeen	
  years	
  of	
  age	
  at	
  the	
  time	
  of	
  the	
  commission	
  of	
  the	
  offense.	
  	
  The	
  

appellant	
  presented	
  evidence	
  that	
  established	
  that	
  he	
  was	
  seventeen	
  

years	
  of	
  age	
  at	
  the	
  time	
  of	
  the	
  commission	
  of	
  the	
  offense.	
  	
  The	
  State	
  of	
  

Texas	
  presented	
  no	
  evidence	
  to	
  contradict	
  the	
  appellant’s	
  evidence	
  on	
  

that	
  particular	
  issue.	
  	
  The	
  trial	
  Court	
  then	
  made	
  a	
  factual	
  finding	
  that	
  the	
  

appellant	
  was	
  seventeen	
  years	
  of	
  age	
  at	
  the	
  time	
  of	
  the	
  commission	
  of	
  

the	
  offense.	
  (R.R.-­‐13)	
  	
  Thereafter	
  the	
  trial	
  Court	
  assessed	
  the	
  appellant’s	
  

punishment	
  as	
  Life	
  in	
  the	
  Texas	
  Department	
  of	
  Criminal	
  Justice-­‐

Institutional	
  Division	
  with	
  the	
  possibility	
  of	
  parole.	
  (R.R.-­‐14)	
  	
  An	
  

amended	
  judgment	
  was	
  entered	
  to	
  reflect	
  the	
  action	
  of	
  the	
  trial	
  Court.	
  

(S.C.R.-­‐3,4)	
  	
  

	
         	
  
	
  
	
  

	
  

	
  

                                                             8
	
  

                                  APPELLANT’S	
  SOLE	
  POINT	
  
                                             OF	
  ERROR	
  
                                                    	
  
                    THE	
  TRIAL	
  COURT	
  ERRED,	
  IN	
  VIOLATION	
  OF	
  
                           THE	
  EIGHTH	
  AMENDMENT	
  TO	
  THE	
  
                   UNITED	
  STATES	
  CONSTITUTION,	
  IN	
  REFUSING	
  
                 THE	
  APPELLANT’S	
  REQUEST	
  FOR	
  A	
  PUNISHMENT	
  
                HEARING	
  CONSISTENT	
  WITH	
  THE	
  HOLDING	
  OF	
  THE	
  
                           UNITED	
  STATE	
  SUPREME	
  COURT	
  IN	
  
                MILLER	
  V.	
  ALABAMA,	
  ____U.S.____,	
  132	
  S.CT.	
  2455	
  (2012)	
  
	
  

	
                                                               	
  	
  	
  	
     	
     	
     	
  

	
                                  ARGUMENT	
  AND	
  AUTHORITIES	
  

	
  	
  	
  	
  As	
  has	
  been	
  noted	
  by	
  both	
  this	
  Court	
  and	
  the	
  Court	
  of	
  Criminal	
  

Appeals,	
  the	
  appellant	
  has	
  never	
  been	
  accorded	
  a	
  sentencing	
  hearing	
  of	
  

any	
  sort	
  and	
  has	
  been	
  sentenced	
  initially	
  to	
  Life	
  without	
  the	
  possibility	
  

of	
  parole,	
  and	
  thereafter	
  to	
  Life.	
  	
  As	
  a	
  consequence,	
  the	
  seventeen	
  year	
  

old	
  defendant2	
  has	
  never	
  been	
  accorded	
  a	
  sentencing	
  hearing	
  which	
  

allowed	
  him	
  to	
  present	
  meaningful	
  mitigation	
  evidence,	
  	
  the	
  Eighth	
  

Amendment	
  to	
  the	
  United	
  States	
  Constitution3,	
  as	
  recently	
  construed	
  in	
  

the	
  context	
  of	
  defendant’s	
  under	
  the	
  age	
  of	
  eighteen	
  at	
  the	
  time	
  of	
  the	
  

offense,	
  mandates	
  that	
  offenders	
  seventeen	
  years	
  of	
  age	
  or	
  younger	
  be	
  

2
 At the time of the offense.
3
 Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual
punishments inflicted.
                                                                9
accorded	
  a	
  sentencing	
  hearing	
  that	
  allows	
  a	
  sentence	
  to	
  take	
  into	
  

account	
  the	
  background	
  and	
  mental	
  and	
  emotional	
  development	
  of	
  a	
  

youthful	
  defendant	
  be	
  duly	
  considered	
  in	
  	
  assessing	
  his	
  culpability.	
  

Miller	
  v.	
  Alabama,	
  supra,	
  pg.	
  2467.	
  (Citing:	
  Eddings	
  v.	
  Oklahoma,	
  102	
  S.Ct.	
  

869	
  (1987)).	
  	
  The	
  Court	
  explained	
  the	
  rationale	
  behind	
  its	
  holding	
  that	
  

life	
  without	
  the	
  possibility	
  of	
  parole	
  for	
  youthful	
  offenders	
  was	
  

inconsistent	
  with	
  the	
  Eighth	
  Amendment	
  in	
  the	
  following	
  terms:	
  

	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  Such	
  mandatory	
  penalties,	
  by	
  their	
  nature,	
  preclude	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  a	
  sentencer	
  from	
  taking	
  account	
  of	
  an	
  offender’s	
  age	
  	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  and	
  the	
  wealth	
  of	
  characteristics	
  and	
  circumstances	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  attendant	
  to	
  it.	
  	
  Miller	
  v.	
  Alabama,	
  supra	
  at	
  2468.	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  The	
  sentencing	
  protocol	
  employed	
  in	
  the	
  instant	
  case	
  is	
  

fundamentally	
  indistinguishable	
  from	
  that	
  found	
  flawed	
  in	
  Miller.	
  	
  Life	
  

in	
  confinement	
  is	
  no	
  less	
  a	
  mandatory	
  sentence	
  than	
  Life	
  in	
  confinement	
  

without	
  the	
  possibility	
  of	
  parole.	
  	
  Consequently	
  a	
  mandatory	
  sentence	
  of	
  

life	
  for	
  a	
  youthful	
  offender,	
  such	
  as	
  that	
  imposed	
  herein,	
  is	
  violative	
  of	
  

the	
  Eighth	
  Amendment	
  because	
  it	
  is	
  a	
  sentence	
  that	
  wholly	
  fails	
  to	
  allow	
  

for	
  the	
  admission	
  and	
  consideration	
  of	
  mitigating	
  factors	
  attributable	
  to	
  

the	
  youth	
  of	
  the	
  offender.	
  	
  See:	
  State	
  v.	
  Dull,	
  351	
  P.2d	
  641	
  (Kansas	
  2015);	
  

State	
  v.	
  Lyle,	
  854	
  N.W.2d	
  378	
  (Iowa	
  2014);	
  Bear	
  Cloud	
  v.	
  State,	
  334	
  P.3d	
  

132	
  (Wyoming	
  2014).	
  

                                                                                    10
	
     	
   	
      	
      	
        PRAYER	
  FOR	
  RELIEF	
  

	
  
             WHEREFORE,	
  PREMISES	
  CONSIDERED,	
  Appellant,	
  James	
  Garza,	
  

prays	
  that	
  this	
  Court,	
  reverse	
  the	
  judgment	
  of	
  the	
  trial	
  Court	
  and	
  

remand	
  the	
  cause	
  for	
  purposes	
  of	
  a	
  new	
  punishment	
  hearing	
  and	
  a	
  

sentence	
  imposed	
  by	
  a	
  jury.	
  

             	
  

/s/Edward F. Shaughnessy,III

EDWARD	
  F.	
  SHAUGHNESSY,	
  III	
  
206	
  E.	
  Locust	
  
San	
  Antonio,	
  Texas	
  78212	
  
(210)	
  212-­‐6700	
  
(210)	
  212-­‐2178	
  (fax)	
  
SBN	
  18134500	
  
Shaughnessy727@gmail.com	
  
Attorney	
  for	
  the	
  appellant	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
	
       	
  
	
       	
      	
        	
  
	
  
	
  
	
  
                                                       11
	
        	
        	
        	
         CERTIFICATE	
  OF	
  SERVICE	
  
	
        	
  

	
        I,	
  Edward	
  F.	
  Shaughnessy,	
  III,	
  attorney	
  for	
  the	
  appellant	
  hereby	
  

certify	
  that	
  a	
  true	
  and	
  correct	
  copy	
  of	
  the	
  instant	
  pleading	
  was	
  served	
  

upon	
  Nico	
  LaHood,	
  Criminal	
  District	
  Attorney	
  for	
  Bexar	
  County,	
  401	
  W.	
  

Nueva,	
  	
  San	
  Antonio,	
  Texas	
  78205	
  by	
  use	
  of	
  the	
  U.S.	
  Mail	
  on	
  this	
  

the__14__	
  October,	
  2015.	
  

	
  

/s/ Edward F. Shaughnessy,III

Edward	
  F.	
  Shaughnessy,	
  III

Attorney	
  for	
  the	
  Appellant

	
  

                                     CERTIFICATE	
  OF	
  COMPLIANCE	
  

	
        I,	
  Edward	
  F.	
  Shaughnessy,	
  III,	
  attorney	
  for	
  the	
  appellant,	
  hereby	
  

certify	
  that	
  the	
  instant	
  document	
  contains	
  	
  1365	
  	
  words.	
  

	
  

//Edward F. Shaughnessy,III

Edward	
  F.	
  Shaughnessy,	
  III

                                                          12