Hathorn, Gene Wilford, Jr

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Hathorn, Gene Wilford, Jr

DecidedApril 9, 2008

DocketWR-65,054-04

StatusPublished

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

Bluebook

Hathorn, Gene Wilford, Jr, (Tex. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-65,054-04 EX PARTE GENE WILFORD HATHORN, JR.

ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN CAUSE

NO. 6958-D IN THE 411^TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

TRINITY COUNTY

Per Curiam; Price and Holcomb, JJ., filed dissenting statements; Johnson, J., dissents; Cochran, J., not participating.

O R D E R

This is a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.071 § 5.

On June 27, 1985, a jury convicted applicant of the offense of capital murder. The jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 37.071, and the trial court, accordingly, set punishment at death. This Court affirmed applicant's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Hathorn v. State, 848 S.W.2d 101 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). Applicant filed his initial post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus in the convicting court on October 14, 1997. This Court denied applicant relief. Ex parte Hathorn, Nos. WR-65,054-01, -02, and -03 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 13, 2006). Applicant's first and second subsequent applications, respectively filed in the trial court on March 17, 2006, and June 9, 2006, were dismissed in the same order denying relief on applicant's initial application. Id. Applicant's third subsequent application was filed in the trial court on November 13, 2007.

Applicant presents two allegations in the instant application. Specifically, he asserts that (1) the punishment questions given did not allow the jury to meaningfully consider his mitigating evidence (a claim that was also raised in his initial habeas application); and (2) the findings and conclusions entered by the trial court regarding the claims raised in his initial habeas application are void and without effect.

We have reviewed the application and find that the allegations do not satisfy the requirements of Article 11.071 § 5. Accordingly, the application is dismissed as an abuse of the writ. Art. 11.071 § 5(c).

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2008.

Do not publish

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

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-65,054-04 EX PARTE GENE WILFORD HATHORN, JR.

ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN CAUSE

NO. 6958-D IN THE 411^TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

TRINITY COUNTY

Per Curiam; Price and Holcomb, JJ., filed dissenting statements; Johnson, J., dissents; Cochran, J., not participating.

O R D E R

This is a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.071 § 5.

On June 27, 1985, a jury convicted applicant of the offense of capital murder. The jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 37.071, and the trial court, accordingly, set punishment at death. This Court affirmed applicant's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Hathorn v. State, 848 S.W.2d 101 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). Applicant filed his initial post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus in the convicting court on October 14, 1997. This Court denied applicant relief. Ex parte Hathorn, Nos. WR-65,054-01, -02, and -03 (Tex. Crim. App. Sept. 13, 2006). Applicant's first and second subsequent applications, respectively filed in the trial court on March 17, 2006, and June 9, 2006, were dismissed in the same order denying relief on applicant's initial application. Id. Applicant's third subsequent application was filed in the trial court on November 13, 2007.

Applicant presents two allegations in the instant application. Specifically, he asserts that (1) the punishment questions given did not allow the jury to meaningfully consider his mitigating evidence (a claim that was also raised in his initial habeas application); and (2) the findings and conclusions entered by the trial court regarding the claims raised in his initial habeas application are void and without effect.

We have reviewed the application and find that the allegations do not satisfy the requirements of Article 11.071 § 5. Accordingly, the application is dismissed as an abuse of the writ. Art. 11.071 § 5(c).

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2008.

Do not publish

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Hathorn, Gene Wilford, Jr, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hathorn-gene-wilford-jr-texcrimapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack