131

MR. JASON T. PEGUES #728196
HUNTSVILLE UNIT
815 12th STREET
HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 773&8

reh/wqu 092,, 201 5

cc/file:

TO; COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
BOX 12308
CAPITOL STATION
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711_

RE: Ex Parte
JASON TYRONE PEGUES

cAUSE No;9a-DcR-026185 Hca

DEBR MADAM/SIR:

,_?H» '7(.02"0‘-/

CORECEWED E?\E

COURT OF CF{IM|NAL APPEALS
FEB 05 2015

AWACMC§@¢<

PLEASE FIND ENCLOSED A NOTICE TO THE COURT BY THE APPLICANT IN

REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED CAUSED NUMBER.

IF YOU WILL PLEASE

PLACE THE ENCLOSED TN THE FILE 0F SAID CAUSE NUMBER SO THAT IT MAY BE

PRESENT AND TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION UPON RULING THE CURRENT APPLICATIOB

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ASSISTANCE.

   

THE APPLICAN

°#ZZY/%e

1#728196

cause no.94-DCR-026185 HCA

1 of_l

-wR-74,762-03

CAUSE N0.94-DCR-026T85 HC&

IN_THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Ex parte

JASON T. PEGUES
IN

AUSTIN, TEXAS

000£00<00<0!¢0°¢01003¢0>¢0>¢0)¢0)609

* NOTICE TO THE COURT *

 

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

THE APPLICANT,JASON T. PEGUES #728196, WOULD LIKE TO BRING TO

 

THIS HoNoRABLE coURT's ATTENTION THE FoLLowING so THAT THE APPLICANT
wILL'NoT FALL UNDER»_ABUSE 'oF wRIT, As wELL As BRIl\IGIN.c-‘l
NoTIcE To THE coURT THAT THE APPLI¢ANT'$ SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION Is
UNDER THE UMBRELLA oF HIS INITIAL APPLICATIoN(wR-7a,762-03,'wHIcH wAs
DENIED wITHoUi wRIiTEN 0RDER oN Aggg§;_gligglg). THIs sUBsEQUENT

APPLICATION IS PURSUANT TO RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE,RULE79.2(d),

 

WHICH IS ALSO IMPLEMENTED IN THE SUBSEQUENT'S MEMORANDUM, REQUESTING
AND SUGGESTING THIS HCNORABLE COURT TO REVIEW THE CONSTITUTIONAL
LEGITAMACY OF THE APPLICANT'S CONVICTION, AS THE APPLICANT CHALLENGES

THE JUDGEMENT OF SENTENCE IN CAUSE NO.26185,(EX parte MORENO,Z&S S.W13d

 

 

 

I.

THIS SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION PRESENTS NEW CREDIABLE, CRITICAL,

 

 

CLEAR and CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE BEFORE APPLICANT'S
INITIAL APPLICATION WAS FILED, WHICH IS ALSO LEGALLY IMPLEMENTED IN

THE NATURE OF PROCEEDING OF THE SUBSEQUENT'S MEMORANDUM, CONTAINING

;*l
l

SUFFICIENT SPECIFIC FACTS ESTABLESHING THAT THIS NEW EVIDENCE WAS

`NOT AVAILABLE BEFORE APPLICANT'S INITIAL APPLICATION WAS FILED, THE

NEW EVIbENCE WILL PRdVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT APPLICANT'S
SUBSTANTIAL RIGHTS PURSUANT TO FEDE§AL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE(SZb)
WERE AFFECTED AND HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED ALONG WITH.
FAMILY CODES AND PARENTAL NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS. DUE TO THIS NEW
EVIDENCE AND SUPPORT BY STATE, FEDERAL, AND SUPREME COURT, THE-
APPLICANT CAN ASSURE THAT REVIEWING AND ADJUDICATING THE MERITS OF

THE APPLICANT'S CLAIMS AND ISSUES IN THIS CASE WILL NOT BE A 'Q

WASTE OF THIS HONORABLE COURT'S TIME, FULLY RESPECTING AND PURSUANT TO
RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, RULE 79.2(d), VERNON'S ANN.TEXAS C.C.P.

art.11.07 (EX parte MORENO, 245 S.W.3d 419 (TEX.CRIM.APP.ZOO8).

II.
THE REsPoNDENT RESPoNDED oN g§g§g§§§_ggigglg, AND THE APPLICANT

RECEIVED THE RESPoNDENT's ANswER oN gé§g§§§_liggl§, AND IMMEDIATELY

JTHE APPLICANT OBJECTED. ATTACHED TO THIS NOTICE IS A COPY OF THE

APPLICANT oBJEcTING To THE RESPoNDENT's ANSwER wHIcH wAs FILED oN
gé§gégg_§£giggl§, AND wouLD LIKE To ALSo sHow THIS HoNoRABLE coURT
THE FoLLowING so THAT THE APPLIcANT_wILL NoT FALL UNDER-
ABUSE oF wRIT(Ex parte MARTINEZ 233 s.w.3d 319 (TEX.cRIM.APP.2007).=

THE APPLICANT'S FIRST Two APPLICATIONS wERE PERTAINING To
PRE-SENTENCE JAIL-TIME cREDIT. THE APPLIcANT'S THIRD APPLICATION IN
wHIcH UMBRELLA'S THIS SUBSEQUENT APPLICATIGN, ls BASED oN THIS
HONORABLE coU§T coMPLETELY ovERRULIN¢ THE DeGarmo DocTRINE IN wHIcH
THE APPLICANT wAS coNVIcTED AND SENTENCED dNDER. THE APPLICANT coULD
NoT HAVE PRESENTED THE CLAIMS AND ISSUES MENTIONED IN HIS THIRD

APPLICATION, IN HIS SECOND APPLICATION, BECAUSE THE LAW HAD NOT YET

cHANGED(THfS HoNoRABLE coURT HAD NoT coMPLETELY ovERRULED THE Decarmo
DocTRINE); (sEE LEDAY v; sTATE at part Iv 95.729 (TEx.cRIM.APP.1998)).
IN THE,RESPONDENT'S ANSwER,,THE RESPoNDENT ATTEMPTED To DERAIL THE
coURT BY AccUsING THE APPLICANT oF FILING FoUR APPLICATIONS ABoUI THE
sAME ISSUE, wHIcH Is NoT TRUE, So THE APPLICANT DID oBJEcT. IN THE
APPLICANT's SUBSEQUENT wRIT, APPLICANT DID NoT PRESENT ANY NEw cLAIHS,
APPLICANT oNLY USED THE NEw EVIDENCE AND sUPPoRT BY sTATE, FEDERAL,
AND sdPREME coURI cASES To`PRoVE BEYoND A REASONABLE DoUBT ALL THE

CLAIMS AND ISSUES THAT WAS PRESENTED IN APPLICANT'S INITIAL APPLICATION.

III.

 

THIS SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION IS PURSUANT TO RULES OF APPELLATE
PROCEDURE, RULE 79.2(d), REQUESTING ANb SUGGESTING THIS HONORABLE
COURT TO REVIEW THE CONSTITUTIONAL LEGITAMACY OF THE APPLICANT'S
CONVICTION ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT IS ONLY CHALLENGING THE JUDGEMENT OF
SENTENCE IN CAUSE No.g§l§§. THE APPLICANT CAN ASSURE THAT REVIEWING
AND ADJUDICATING THE MERITS OF THE APPLICANT'S CLAIMS AND ISSUES IN

THIS CASE WILL NOT BE A WASTE OF THIS HONORABLE COURT'S TIME.

£BAX§§
WHEREFORE, PREMfSES CONSIDERED, THE APPLICANT PRAYS THAT THIS COURT
WILL CONSIDER THIS NOTICE TO THE COURT IN REFERENCE TO THE APPLICANT'S

SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION .

     
    

\sUBMIITED,
/’ @

 

  

A§B§ TT ngUEs #728196,
THE APPLICANT=

 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 

l,JASON T. PEGUES #728196, HEREBY CETIFY THAT A TRUE AND CORRECT AND

ORIGINAL APPLICANT*S NOTICE TO THE COURT HAS BEEN MAILED Via U.S.POSTAL

SERVICE TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, BOX12308,

_3_

cc/file:

CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711, FOR FILING AND TO BE PRESENTED
TO THE SAID COURT.

sIGNED oN THIS 62¢4, day ofF@Ar

  
 
  

ES #728196
815 12th STREET
HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 77348

INMATE DECLARATION

 

I,JASON T§ PEGUES #728196, PRESENTLY INCARCERATED IN WALKER COUNTY,

 

TEXAS HEREBY DECLARE UNDER THE PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE
AFOREMENTIONED IN THE/THIS NOTICE TO THE COURT IN REFERENCE TO THE
APPLICANT'S SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION (94-DCR-026185 HCA) IS TRUE AND
CORRECT.

sIGNED oN,THIs Q’Z"”[, day of /-@bm_q§z,zols.

 

JAsoN’T. §ggUEs #728196
815 12th`sTREET
HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 77348
THE APPLICANT=

CAUSE N0.9&~DCR~026185 HCA

 

JASoN T. P§suzs 3723196 THE zoo:h oxsrnzc§ coeur
PET!TIGNER» ,
Va¢ op

"\-»`__,»..~b,_`

z
§
,i

THE STATE OF TEXAS FORT BEND CDUNTY, TEXAS

RESPQNDENT

emi=mw»canmm\m¢mc:nm¢m

PETITIONER'S OBJBCTION TO BESPONDENT'S ANSWER

UNBEE TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCBDURB 33.1

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE QF SAID COURT:

COMES NQW,JASGN T. PEGUES #728195, PETITIONER, ?v$-se, IN THE
ABO'E ST¥LED AND NUMBERED CAUSE OF ACTION RESPE£TFULLY SUBMIT THIS
PETITIONER*S OBJECTION TO THE RES?ONDENT°S ANSWER UNDER TEXAS §ULES
GF A?PHLLATE PRDCEDURR 33.1 AND WOULD LIKE TQ SHOW THE HONORABLE‘

COURT THE FULLGWING:

PBOCEDUKAL BISTOBY

PETITIoNER FrLEo en APPLchrxou von HABEAS coayus suasEQuENT
wait 11.07 rs nzrzuencs To PETITIomER's rsrTIAL aPpLIcATION on
g§g§§§§§_;;&gglg. PRESENTIWQ THE nxAcT cLArms THAT was IN run INITIAL
AP?LICATIoN. THE sueszoueur MEMQRANBUM PRESENTE» §§g_§g§g;égg§;
cnx'rxcm.1 cLEAn and couvxnclmc Evruzwce THAT wAs ser AvAILABLE BEFoRE
THE INiTIAL avvacarzom was Fxnnn. wzmrrxouan's Rzouzsr rs sga a msu

PUNISHMENT HEARING, SPECIFICALLY REQUESTIHG TIME-SERVED FOR RELIEF

BASED ON THE OVERRRULING OF THE DeGarmo DOCTRINE, IN WHICH THE
PETITIONER/AP§LICANT WAS SENTENCED UNDER. THE RESPONDENT RESPONDED

0N»11§§1111_121;912>

STATEMENT OF FACTS

.THE;PETIrIoNER REcEIvEn THE REsPoNDENT's ANswER oN §§§gé§g;l&ggl§
IN REGARDS 10 THE PETITIoNER’s sUBsEQUENT APPLICATI§N wRIT 11307.
§QBASED oN THE REsPoNDENT!s ANswER, THE PETITIoNER rs oBJEcTING 10
MULTIPLE sTATEMENTs THE REsPoNnENT EXPRESSED, so THAT.THIS HONORABLE
couRT wliL NoT BE bERA1LED FRoM THE Focus oF'THE~APPLIcATIoNVs
MoTIvE AND PdRPosE,

I.

IN APPLICANTFS INITIAL wRIT APPLICATIoN; APPLICANT AssERTED THAT

THE APPLICATIQN wAs BEING'FILED PuRsuANT 10 THE PRovlsIoNs qF

ARTxcLE 11.073(b),sEc.h(a> (1> (b>; a<a) sTATING THAT 1F A
,sunsEQuENi;APPLIcATIoN FoR wR1T'oF HABEAS coRPUs 13 111ED AFrER FINAL
nlsPosITon 91 AN INITIAL APPLICATIQN cHALLENGING THE sAME comv!crlow
(ALTHQuGH A?FLICANT 13 cHALLENGING oNLY THE sENTENcE>, A couRT MAY
NoT codsIDER THE MERITS oF on GRANT RELIEF`§ASED oN roe suBsEQuENT
EsTAnLIsHINc THAT= (1) and (2)...AccoRD1Nc 10 THE nEsPoNDENT's

ANswEn oN PAGE 6. THE NEw EVIDENCE THAT 15 PRESENTED 1N THE APPLICANT's
suBsEQUENT wRIT <THE APPLIcANT's INVESTIGATINc/ARRESTING REcoRn) wAs
NoT AvAILABLg aEFonE THE APPLICANT'$ INITIAL APPLICATIoN wAs FILEn.
THE¢suBsEQuENT AP?LIcATIoN wAs cLEAnLY uNoER THE UMBRELLA oF THE
INITIAL wR11, APPL1cANT nln NoT PRESENT ANY NEw cLA1Ms, ALL cLAIMs

_ wERE oF TnosE 1N THE 1N111AL wRIT As THE APPLICANT'$ suBsEQUENT._

WRIT/MEMORANDUM SHGWS ON PAGE ONE THE WRIT NUMBER OF THE INITIAL WRIT

As wELL As NA1dRE oF PR0cEEDINc, FuLLY REsPEcTINc RuLEs 01 AFPELLATE
Pnocznunt, Ru1E 19.2 (d) (Ex parte nonnsoL 245 s.d¢sd 419 ;1Ex§cRIM.
Agg;ggg§, 301 111 RESPoNnENT onvlousLY 010 101 REVIEw THE APPLICANT's
sunsequENT MEHoRANDuM wagns-A?pLIcANr sTATED sUFFICIENT FACTS 10
ES1ABLISH AN ExcEPTIoN uNDER ART.11.07,sec.a(a). DUE 10 THE sstEQuENT
wRII BEING FILED uNDER THE uMBRELLA 01 131 11111AL wRIT, PRESENTING
THE ExAcT sAME cLAIMs, THE 1N111AL PURSUANT 01 PRovIsIoNs AND»NATURE
01 PRocEED1Ncs sTxLL APPLY, 1N warcn THE REsPoNoEN1's ANswEn 10 1HE
sunsEQuENT wRIT 13 151 sAME ANSWER 01 THE 1N111AL wR11.4w119 THE
lsunsEQm~:NT APPLIcAmIoN`PREsENTING NEw EvInENcE THAT'wAs N01 ABAILABLE
¢@QGOBBEFoRE THE 1N111AL wRIT wAs FILED, REQu1REs dew FINDINcs.
FuRTHERM031 AND 1011 10 THE couRT, PETITIoNER rs A LAYMAN 01 THE LA§,
0NSKILLED AND uNLEARNEp IN 131 oRAFTING 01 M0110Ns, wRITS, AND oTHER
FoRMAL PLEADING$ ANB REQuEsT THE coURT 10 1010 THE PETITIoNER 10 LEss
sTRINGENT sTANnARDs THAN LEARNED ATTORNEY's (sEE HAYNES vs. KERNER,:
92 s. cc. 594) AND 10 N01 DENY 111 1111110NER 111 couRT's ATTENTIoN 10
THE 00N11x1 01 THE PE11110N1R'$ cLAIMs  01 THIS onachIoN BASED 0N A
PRocBnuRAL on FoRMALITv 0111011101 11 THERE ARE ANY, Non ovER-Loox
ANY uNASSIGNED ERRoR.

II.

WITH THE APPLICANT BEING Pro-se, AND A LAYMAN, THE AEPLICANT SHOULD
NOT HAVE TO ASSERT A STATUTOR¥ RIGHT.`A?PLICANT AS$ERT ALL THE CORRECT
PROCEDURES AND PROVISIONS AT THE STANDARD OF § PRo-SE AND LAYMAN OF.
..THE.LAW. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE RESPONDENT.IS SEARCHING FOR ANY`REASON
vTO NbT ALLOW THE NEW EVIDENCE AND IT'S SUPPORT THAT PROVES`ALL THE
CLAIMS AND ISS…UES` STATED BY THE APPLICANT IN HIS INITIAL APPLICATION.-
THE NEW EVIDENCE PRESENTED IN APFLICANT'S SUBSEQUENT WRIT WAS NCT

AyAlLABLE 3110 1 HIS 11111AL 1111 wAs FILED weren MAKES THE suBsEQuENT

_3'_

wRIT APPLIcATioN RELEVANT AND NoT AN Anuss oF wRIT(Ex parte MARTINEZ
233_s.w.3d~319§TEx.cRIM.APP.2007); "IN THIS cAsE, wE nnclog THAT IT
13 NoT AN ABUSE 0F THE wRIT oF HABEAS ¢oRPus To sEEK RELIEF on THE
MERIToRIous cLAIM PRESENTED IN APPLchNT's sUBsEQuENT`sTATE HABEAS
APPLICATIoN." v

THE REsPoNnENT MENTIoNEn IN IT*s ANéwER THAT_THIs'wAs THE APPLICANT
Founrn APFLIcATIoN AND now THIS sUBsEQuENT~wRIT rs AN ABusE oF wRIt,
HowEvER, APPLICANT wouLn LIKE To sTATE FoR-THE REcoRD so THAT THE,.
AyPLIcANT's APPLICAT:QN wILL mar nn MIscoNsTRuén. ouT_oF THE FouR
APPLIcATIoNs,.Two oF THE APPLIcATIoNs wake coNcERNINc'PREsENTENcE

` JAIL-TzME-cnnnzr§ THE LAsT Two APPLIcATIoNs wERB PERTAINING To THE
coURT oF cRxMINAL APPEAL ovERRuLING THE necarho DocTRINE wnlca THE
’APPLIcANT was coNvIcTED AND sENTENcED uNDER, wHIcH ALLowED AP§LICANT
To FRESENT`THE ISSUES MENTIoNED‘IN THE iNITIAL wRIT ANn sUBsEQvENT.
APPLICANT §gggg §gg g§g§ PRESENTED THESE cLAIMs AND rssuEs IN §IS,
2nd APPLICATIoN wulcu wAs FILED ARoUND JANuARY 8,201§ coNcERNING
PRESENTENCE.JAIL~TIME cnznxr,'nEcAUsE THE HoNoRAnLE coURT g§g §gl-*
coMPLETELY ovERRuLEo THE'DOCTRINE IN wuicn APPLIcANT wAs comvlcTEo
ANn_sENTENch uNDER To FRESENT THEsE-cLAIMs ANo Issuns(§§§,ggggg_g;

STATE at part.IV,p§.729 §TEX.CRIM.APP.1998).

III¢
THE PETITIONER IS OSJECTING TO THE RESPONDENT'S ANSWER AS A WHOLE
FOR ATTEMPTING TO STOP THE APPLICANT'S SUBSEQUENT WRIT FkOM GQINQ
FORWARD IN FRIVOLOUS WAYS. THE RESPONDENT IS VERY AWARE THAT THE
EVIDENCE AND SUPPORT ?ROVES`BEYON§ A REASONABLE DOUBT IHAT THE
APPLICANT'S'DUE PRbCESS RIGHTS'WERE VIOLATE§, SUBSTANTIAL RIGHTS WERE
AFFECTED, FAMIL¥ CODES AND PABENTAL NO&IFICATION REQUIREMENTS WERE

_vIoLATEn§-AND,THE¢RESPQNDEN; PRESENTING ALL'IHAT THBY_cAN KNowINQ

-4-

THAT'IT CARRIES NO WEIGHT.

g§AYER
waEREFoRE, PREMI$ES coNsInEREn, THE PETITIoNER PRAYS THAT THIS cover
wILL coNsInEn THI§ onJEcTIoN To THE REsPoNDENT»s ANswER IN REFERENCE

TO THE PETITIONERFS SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION WRIT OF HABEAS CGRPUS 11.07.

RESPECTFULLY‘SUBMITTED,

 

JASON T. PEGUES #728196

THE PETITIONER¢` "

THE APPLICANT: cause no.
'9&»DCR~026185 HCA

CERTIFICATE 0F $ERVICE

I,JASQN T. PEGUES #728196, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT A TRUE AND CORRECT AND
ORIGINAL PETITfONER”S'OBJECTI¢N TO RESPONDENT}S ANSWER HAS BEEN MAILED
via U,S.POSTAi S§RVICE TO THE DISTRICT CLERK, ANNIE REBECCA ELLIOTT, 'j
THE 240tb.JUDICIAL DISTRICT COFRT IN FORT BEND COUNTY, TEXAS WHERE THE‘
HONORABLE JHDGE THQMAS R.CULVER III, PRESIDES, FOR FILING AND

PRESENTATIONYTO,SAID COURT.

sIGNED.oN THIS ggg, day of JAN§A§X,zol§.

 

JASON T. PEGUES #728196
815 12th STREET
HUNTSVILLE, TEXAS 773&8

v ' InnATt DECLARATIQN
I,jAsbN T.'PEGuEs'#128196, PRESENTLY INcAchRATEn IN wALKER couNTY, Tx.
HEBEEY DECLARE dNDER THE PENALTY oF'PERJuRY THAT rue AFoREMENTIoNEn IN
MY oBJchroN To THE REsPoNnENT's ANstR rs runs ANn coRREcT. v l

sIGNEn oN THIS sth, day of gé§gé§g,zols.
_ n . ¢` z 3 .
cc/file: 1

._5_

