Jamarios Lechristopher Canton v. State

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: April 22, 2015
• Docket: 12-12-00118-CR
• Status: Published

Opinion

I II 1 'COPY

SHARON KELLER ABEL ACOSTA PRESIDING JUDGE Court of Criminal Appeals CLERK (512)463-1551 P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION LAWRENCE E. MEYERS CHERYL JOHNSON AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 SIAN SCHILHAB GENERAL COUNSEL MIKE KEASLER (512)463-1597 BARBARA P. HERVEY ELSA ALCALA BERT RICHARDSON KEVIN P. YEARY DAVID NEWELL JUDGES FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS 12th Coun Jf Appeals District Wednesday, April 22, 201

JAMARIOS LECHRISTOPHER CANTON Robertson Unit - TDC #1771951 12071 FM 3522 Abilene, TX 79601

Re: CANTON, JAMARIOS LECHRISTOPHER CCA No. WR-81,430-02 COANo. 12-12-0CrU8-CR Trial Court Case No. F1017409-B

The court has issued an opinion on the above referenced cause number

Sincerely,

Abel Acosta, Clerk

cc: 12th Court Of Appeals Clerk (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) District Attorney Nacogdoches County (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL) District Clerk Nacogdoches County (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

Supreme Court Building, 201 West 14th Street, Room 106, Austin, Texas 78701 Website www.txcourts.gov/cca.aspx FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS 1 -.in Cr-'^ r-; Appeals District

APR 2 3 2015

TYLER TEXAS CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

NO. WR-81,430-02

EX PARTE JAMARIOS LECHRISTOPHER CANTON, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. F1017409 IN THE 145TH DISTRICT COURT FROM NACOGDOCHES COUNTY

Per curiam.

OPINION

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ ofhabeas corpus. Exparte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated

assault and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Twelfth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction.

Canton v. State, No. 12-12-00118-CR (Tex. App. — Tyler, December 20, 2012). This Court

dismissed his petition for discretionary review as untimely filed.

Applicant contends that his pro se petition for discretionary review was erroneously

dismissed as untimely by this Court, because he placed it into the mail on the last day before the . 2

filing deadline. This Court remanded to the trial court two times to try to ascertain whether

Applicant did place his petition in the mail before the filing deadline, and if so why the petition was

not received by this Court until fourteen days after the filing deadline. No records could be obtained

from the prison mail system to indicate when Applicant's petition was placed in the mail, and

although the mail room supervisor provided several possible explanations for this Court's delay in

receiving the petition, it cannot be determined with any certainty why the petition was not received

until fourteen days after the filing deadline.

We find, therefore, that due to a breakdown in the system, Applicant was deprived of his

right to petition this Court for discretionary review. See Exparte Riley, 193 S.W. 3d 900 (Tex.

Crim. App. 2006). Applicant is granted the opportunity to file an out-of-time petition for

discretionary review of thejudgment of the Twelfth Court of Appeals in Cause No. 12-12-00118-CR

that affirmed his conviction in Cause No. F1017409 from the 145th District Court of Nacogdoches

County. Applicant shall file his petition for discretionaryreview with this Court within 30 days of

the date on which this Court's mandate issues.

Delivered: April 22, 2015 Do not publish