Choice, Willie Edward

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: January 2, 2015
• Docket: WR-80,474-03
• Status: Published

Opinion

4Q471-03 /

Tfre, Cour-f of' GRiMincj/ Af>f>4>j*Ls fiP 7eKa&

JW? KlU.tr^r iMH33=& ^v-H oP U-^Leq-S (Lor^is ^un-sucno-fr ^0 kt-frlLftf

"IHtShkbPJem

^d^lki^^su^awx '^vtiJ. Gh ttih Motim, and hnn« \£ U M& M^id/}>yj &ft tfiis

fasfeo/'jLt/y i)u4mlHedt ttflftfatl

Amwi4>. 7^-s 7f/d7

" JAM 02 2015 t—

jVo@i &eost®» Gtefk CAUSE NO. 1284277-B

WILLIE EDWARD CHOICE § IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL § US § APPEALS § STATE DF TEXAS § AUSTIN TEXAS §

Motion to object to the trial court finding of facts and conclusion of law.

TO THE HONORABLE DODGE OF SAID COURT:

Comes now applicant Willie Edward Choice before-this.court in this

motion and object to the trial courts conclusion of law on the

following in.the States application page 3 at 16 alleged the app licant was not placed.in jeopardy tuice for same offense. See

State wrif exhibit B and C indictment. In the probable cause rep

ort taken by affiant Dackie Blanchard during the forenic interview

of the complaintantDatavia M. Evangelists third paragraph under

probable cause. The complainant alleged on or about October 20,

2010 at 1006 Carolyn Ct., Humble Texas the offense supposedly

occurred against her. The affiant Oaekie Blanchard appeared be

fore the assistant district attorney of Harris county Texas and

stated under oath that Willie Edward Choice the defendant alleg

edly committed the offfense against the child on or about March

17, 2010 inconstant with the childs statement in the report. In

the second paragraph in the probable cause report the'affiant interviewed the sister Davondria Evangelists that stated during

the interview alleged the offense committed against her on March

17, 2010 however the affiant Jackie Blanchard stated under oath

that the offense allegedly occurred against the child Davondria

Evanglista on or about October 20, 2010 inconstant with the re

port. This error violates the applicants right to due process of law, U.S. Constitution fourteenth and f if th t-::. .V;. Amendment.

However, both girls testified in the first trial cause no. 12B4276

litigating their claim against the applicant therein was found

not guilty and acquitted of the offense alleged. The State was

barred from relitigating the same issues in a second trial.

Applicant believe that because of the affiant error to due process

of law both indictments should have been "Squashed". Applicants

trial counsel was on a fully probated suspension and was not

eligible to practice law in the state of Texas deceitfully llook

the case. Under the circumstances did not challenge the State

prosecutor or made any attempt, to prevent a second prosecution.

Violated double jeopardy U.S. Const. 5th Amendment . (see) doc

ument from the State.bar of Texas. Applicant pray that the Court

of Criminal Appeal will act accordingly as justice require.

tted

/^Sj^n ature l2/t2{2Dff STATE BAR OF TEXAS

Office ofthe ChiefDisciplinary Counsel

October 23, 2014

Willie Edward Choice TDCJ #01776962 Neal Unit 9005 Spur 591 Amarillo, Texas 79107

Re: Osborne, John Carroll Barcard #15333200

Mr. Choice:

Pursuant to your request, I have researched our disciplinary records and report that we show the -following:

The following disciplinary action involving professional misconduct has been taken against Mr. Osborne's law license.

Action Date Sanction Start/End Date 09/09/2013 Partially Probated Suspension 01/01/2014-12/31/2014: suspension 01/01/2015-12/31/2016: probation

12/15/2009 Fully Probated Suspension (01/01/2010 -12/31/2013^) ' —— —i •"**

Please let me know if you need additional information or if I can be of further assistance to you.

Sincerely,

'Areli Arel f2fte/Zb/f Office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel State Bar of Texas

P.O.BOX 12487, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711-2487, 512.427.1350; Fax: 512.427.4167