Court Opinion

ID: 4065135
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-29 21:51:38.807818+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:31:46.294806
License: Public Domain

/-7¢/6~¢/57‘ 3,_ ,10/5

§HWE@EWE m '

,q[, @/ /}CQQ;, C/C,,.k ©@UW@F©@MNAM@P§AL@
/Ul 01 BOX /2503', 07]0/'/`0~/ 49 /0)7 l Ab@§&@@§§a,©g@?k

Az/:W/¢ ,"/E»M; 7Y7//

U@/m 15 L/'v/jl/G~J ¢/35230 §
_?Oéa /-'/77 35/6’ 57/7@:

l? wymme "77705
De/)r /V)n Ac 057/?',

7/7 /"€FE/’€/?c£’ 7;. aar /cj’/_/?/‘ 70_/?76’ jL:é/ZZ, Z@/f, 001
qu’Z?a/' your /"@@m/: gaf /7@7'3/50¢¢/2'//90@ /4 -wr/?;/"AA¢§@AS
for/nu }7'/6.>¢/ //7 7;£ @¢¢/7?/~_[/‘/;);//}0/ /9/0/034¢1 j:¢JrOF'
77;6’ /7//9/'/’/.5 CbunV)_/' olsmrc/Gfk //)Cju/r>/'/?§ 1415007_/7/)'/ wff“/_/
/}7 Q'AMJ@ #'/035/59 /9}_¢_>_¢6, 107/z .QA/)/'c’/ 5607’/5?@# c/@cc»/f/`/;ue
,0@7/'26’ (€nc/@.S@¢/), _/'/)7 jena/you % O/’c/é>r’ 0/@"77}29 / 741 71"
0/‘5771'¢7’_[0 urTT"or¢/@r'/;gj 73; U/§Nl?`E/€r/V /? 7/':9/75/§/‘ m/
wri`?/#/p$§/é ?'E /`; )/m//' 0%`/“72@”[£/7¢/05@¢//,

TVFM!T:Z` u//'// /16°/9r };am your 0 /-”F/é@ 60 /77! 020/751

.30 /
/Z¢cm» ;/_ Z /

063/7/7/\§ '[, /_.;1%?55

 

 

 

 

111 accordance With Sect

ion 552.028 Governm'en '
*Req`uest for information

§ _ c.

olith is imprisoned
` a correctional facility; or

at indiv
the it

or confined in
(2) An agent ofiil iduai, other than that individual’s

orney is reques fin `
that is subject to disd

171/556

 

 

No'.'i"03'5'r69:13

EX PARTE ` §

 

 

§ 0F

DENNIS L. LIVINGS,
Applicant § HARRIS CGUNTY, TEXAS

STATE’S PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ()RDER
The Court has considered the application for writ of habeas corpus, the State’s answer and
official court records iri the above-captioned cause. The Court finds that there are no controverted,
previously unresolved facts material to the legality of the applicant's confinement which require an
evidentiary hearing and recommends that the relief requested be denied for the following reasons:
1. The applicant challenged his conviction in his previous application for writ of

. habeas corpus in cause number lO35169-A.

761014'~

he makes claims that directly challenge his conviction, after the final disposition of the
applicant’s previous application for writ of habeas corpus.

3. All subsequent writ applications regarding the same conviction, including
subsequent applications that do not challenge the conviction, must meet the requirements
of Article ll-.07 §4(a) by including sufficient specific facts establishing that the current
claims could not have been presented previously because the factual or legal basis for the
claim was unavailable; or that, by a preponderance of the evidence, but for a violation of the
United States Constitution, no rational juror could have found Applicant guilty beyond a

reasonable doubt. Ex parte Whitesz'de, 12 S.W.3d 819 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (emphasis

added).

is/aa

  

2. *"`""`The`appiieant filed the ingram appii§aiibn`foi habeas'c`orp£is§""l'<')`j$i6941§, 'i*ri""v"viii"c'iiw"”`

 

4. The applicant has failed to include sufficient specific facts establishing that the
current claims could not have been presented previously because the factual or legal basis
for the claim was unavailable; or that, by a preponderance of the evidence, but for a
violation of-the United States Constitution, no rational juror could have found the
applicant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 § 4
(a).

5. ` In all things, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that his conviction was

improperly obtained or that he is being improperly confined.

Accordingly, it is recommended to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals that relief be

denied.

l.`~)

THE CLERK IS ORDERED to prepare a transcript of all papers in cause number 1035169-
B and transmit same to the Court of Criminal Appeals as provided by TEX. CoDE CRIM. PROC.
ANN. art. 11.07 § 3. The transcript shall include certified copies of the following documents:

A. the application for writ of habeas corpus, together with all attachments;

B. the State’s Original Answer, together with all attachments;

C. the Court's order;

D. the indictment (or information), judgment and sentence, and the docket sheets in
cause number 1035169; `

E. State’s Proposed_ Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order; and
F. The applicant's Proposed Findings of Fact (if any).

THE CLERK is further ORDERED to send a copy of this order to the applicant,

~»eDennis--L:-l;ivings;»#~1~3‘5-2308"=*Stiles'Unit, 3060~FM"35-1'4~,» rBeaumont», TX~~77-705, and-to~counsel~~~--~~--~-~- -

for State, Andrew J. Smith, 1201 Franklin, Suite 600, Houston, Texas 77002.

By the following signature, the Court adopts the State’s Proposed Findings of Fact,

Conclusions of Law and Order in cause no. 1035169-B.

//
Signed on this/ L[ day of§€/ /J z ' , 2015.