Anderson, Walter

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedSeptember 16, 2016
DocketPD-0915-16
StatusPublished

This text of Anderson, Walter (Anderson, Walter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anderson, Walter, (Tex. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

LwUy 4^c, 75*8r/

S^UxU U./)7 dWt" U/04 , C[iy2o^A cjU^A (Xti^^ $e>kiej

1 P^eo S£ ftyv^ 4Ud t^rs 6^v4 ^ /+> Aff?AJ;?e<> v***i

t^OX l^^ Gfc^W >M^n ifluj^A T*< 70 7/f

s&yaa it** tody fF ^belAcosia,Cteric r

Afferx^C & • *

CoA^wdy • 0 Pa^O A^peKvc)e.< D LETTER BRIEF TO THE

TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

EN BANC

TR.CT.NO. 20118

To the Honorable Judges of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. I have been

convicted of a crime I did not do. There is more evidence to support the facts that there

was no crime committed at all. After two trials I was convicted by a prosecutor, Bill Ray

Gant, who was allowed by the State Court to use unethical tactics to create an unfair,

unconstitutional trial.

I come before this, the highest State Court in Texas, to grieve the following: It is

my right, according to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to have my

grievance heard. The record will reflect the following:

In March of 2002, a one day trial was held where the State Court allowed

Assistant District Attorney Billy Ray Gant to completely side step Discovery and Texas

Rules of Evidence to create a trial so prejudicially unfair as to render it completely

Unconstitutional^111 Amendment right to impartial jury (Fair trial). 14th Amendment Equal Protection,,of law,and Due Process.

In December 2003, the 6th District Court of Criminal Appeals, Texarkana,

affirmed the conviction via a Direct Appeal that attacked none of the trial errors

preserved by trial attorney, Donnie Jarvis Jr. of Sherman, Texas. This attorney was court

appointed for trialandthe Direct Appeal by the convicting court. Attorney for the Direct Appeal has a duty to inform his client of it being affirmed by the Court of Criminal

Appeals, yet he did not. It was a blatant prejudicial act hiding the fact that he deliberately

hid certain facts from the higher court that would have reversed this conviction.

A State Habeas Corpus was filed. The common man's only Writ of Right to

grieve the issues of an unlawful conviction to, first, the convicting court then the Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals, my right to "Petition the Government for Redress of

Grievances" is protected in the United States Constitution Amendment number one,

Article I section 9 of the United States Constitution clearly states, "The privilege of the

writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended." Yet my first Habeas Corpus was

suspended and then rendered ineffective by the convicting court. It was literally removed

from the Appellate process altogether. With no accountability by this court or any other.

Later, after discovering impeachment evidence that was deliberately withheld by the

prosecution during trial, a State Evidentiary hearing was held proving a gross miscarriage

of justice. But I was denied reliefdue to the State Courts determination that the first

Habeas Corpus petitionwas the place to address the issues presented, "No second bite at

the apple." Yet the first Habeas was never heard! Even after this very court ordered

FanninCounty to process this writ, they refused. Until a general denial was issuedby the

very entity of the judicial systemthat railroadedme in trial. No State judge

acknowledged receipt of the writ. NoJState judge addressed the same issues that "Should

have been presented in petitioners original Habeas." In essence, this State Court was

allowed to completely side step any wrongdoing of blatant acts of unethical,

unconstitutional behavior by this very court. (See enclosed documents.) I had no effective representation in trial to protect my rights as a United States

Citizen. The same ineffective attorney was put in place to protect the State Court of

wrongdoing and preserve a conviction that was illegal, prejudicial and unconstitutional. I

had NO effective Direct Appeal. No petition for Discretionary Review and no State

Habeas Corpus. The papers were filled out and filed, but no State Post Conviction

Review to insure conformity in the judicial process that governs our society.

The Federal Courts use this against me to deny me relief. Just like Fannin County

used their own mishandling of the first State Habeas Corpus to deny the second. This is

Texas justice? What is the purpose of this court if not to fix what needs fixing? How

many othershave been subject to this kind of judicial treatment? When will somebody do

something about it?

PRAYER

My hope is that, as a United States Citizenunder two Constitutions that forbid

this kind of treatment, the Texas Constitution and the United States Constitution, this

Honorable Court, who holds Jurisdiction over this matter, will appoint a Court of Inquiry,

in the interest ofjustice, to look and see what I say is true. Ask Questions. Protect my

Rights! Please give me dueprocess! Start withthe trial and askAttorney Donnie Jarvis

Jr. of Sherman, Texas, Why he didn't address Blatant recorded trial errors in the Direct

Appeal? Ask him why he failed to notify me of its being affirmed, robbing meof a

P.D.R. Ask the County Judge why she failed to acknowledge petitioners FirstHabeas

Corpus and why she, (Judge Laurine Blake) ignored an order bythis very court. Ask why I did not get proper protection under the law and due process as prescribed in the

14th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Recently I filed a motion for Leave to file an Out of Time Petition for

Discretionary Review citing ex-parte Wilson and ex-parte Jarrett, but was denied. There

was no reason given. An Out of Time P.D.R. is proper to rectify attorney error. It would

also allow me to prove everything in this letter brief as it is all a matter of record.

My Direct Appeal and the handling of the first Habeas Corpus is so prejudicial it

is the very definition of Obstruction of Justice. To do nothing is the very definition of

Tyranny. I've been trying to get a review for fifteen (15) years! Just take a look.

PLEASE!

Thank You.

Respectfully Submitted,

Walter G. Anderson #1092654

Eastham Unit, Lovelady, Texas

"to ^txv\v\«» CouaW Cm Awo^W* $>WU [1.07

D^ AllO^ fur\*V(Vv (j)aA\y W^'^M^ 4o ^lAe Or\ Scanned Dec 14, 2010

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS -•---"; ^r WR-61,082-01

WALTER G. ANDERSON, Relator

DISTRICT CLERK OF FANNIN COUNTY, Respondent

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS FROM FANNIN COUNTY

Per Curiam.

ORDER

This is an original application for writ ofmandamus. Relator contends that he has sent an

application for writ of habeas corpus to the District Clerk of Fannin County and that more than

35 days have passed without the writ either being filed or forwarded to this Court. There is no

record of the habeas corpus application having been filed in this Court, and no record of a timely

filed Order Designating Issues.

It is this Court's opinion that additional informationis required before a decision can be

ft pp-t ad? v ft t/- Scanned Dec 14, 2010 ;f| reached on the motion for leave to file the instant action. The Respondent, District Clerk of

FanninCounty, is orderedto file withthis Court within thirty days a response by submitting on

the recordsuch habeas corpus application, a copy of a timely filed orderdesignating issuesto be

investigated, see Martin v. Hamlin, 25 S.W.3d 718 (Tex. Crim. App.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ex Parte Wilson
956 S.W.2d 25 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1997)
Martin v. Hamlin
25 S.W.3d 718 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2000)
Appeal of Cessna
10 A. 1 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1887)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Anderson, Walter, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-walter-texapp-2016.