Lopez, Richard

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: May 31, 2016
• Docket: WR-85,166-01
• Status: Published

Opinion

Cause No. 09-04380-CRF-361-A

In The Court of Criminal Appeals

Austin, Texas

In Re: Richard Lopez #16739-19 Relator

Petition From The 361St Judicial District

of

Brazos County, Texas

Honorable Jude Langley, District Judge

Appellants Original Mandamus Proceeding

ECE\VEO IN Richard Lopez#l673749 COURT ;F CRIMINAL APPEALS Mark W. Stiles Unit 3060 Route 3514 Beaumont, Texas 77705-7635

Abe\ Acosta, Clerk TABLE OF-CONTENTS Pg. # INDENTITY OF PARTIES 2

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES i

STATEi•iENT OF THE CASE 5

STATEMENT OF FACTS 5

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 5

ISSUES TO BE PRESENTED 5

ARGUMENT1WRIT OF MANDAMUS 6-8

PRAYER 8

VERIFICATION 9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 9

:r1 ht.:lJ::.. Ni f-~:.2. "' i,.,. £1-\l' i. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES CASE'S Pg. #

Board of Pardon & Parole V. Court Appeals,910 S.W.2d 481,483(Tx.Cr.App.l995) 8

McCREE v. Hamton,824 s.w. 2e 578 (Tex.Crim.App.l992) 7,8

STATUTES

Texas c.c.P. Art .11.07 3,5,6

Texas c.c.P. Art.ll-07 (b) 6

Texas c.c.P. Art.ll-07 (c) 3,7,8,9

Texas c.c.F. Art .11.07 (d) 6,7 ,8

Texas R.A.P. Rule 73(5) 5,6;'7,8,9

'Texas R.A.P. 52 5

Texas Govt.Code §22.221 5

"'•• -.,_.f.2! I :! 7 ~. •;

T~R.A.P. 72.1 ;72.2 1,2

T.R.A.P. 73(5) 1

V.A.C.C.P. Art.ll.07 §3(c)(d) 2

V.A.C.C.P. 404 §1 1,2

CONSTITUTION

Texas Const.Art.5 §5 1

.a. The Court of Criminal Appeals (Clerk) P.O.Box 12308 Capital Station Austin, Texas 78711

Re; Writ of Mandamus§

Dear Mr.Acosta; (greeting)

Please find enclosed the original and (2) copies of the following documents to be filed for review:

(t) AnnlicRtion for Writ of Mandamus with Brief in Support. !),_ j M o 7-:I"D ,.; 1-t::r ;_e. "'4e.. . In addition, please allow me to be excused from providing any additional copies pursuant to T.R.A.P. Rule 2, whereas, I am incarcerated and indigent and have no means of making additional copies.

Submitted LH,s Day of 2016 Sincerely, Thankful Richard Lopez (Proese) Beaumont, Texas 77705

4. Identity of Parties and Counsel

Respondent

Honorable Judge Lang ley 361 St District Judge Brazos County, Texas

Relator

Richard Lopez (Pro-Se) 3060 FM 3514 Beaumont, Texas 77705-7635

Reil Parties of Interest Honorable Judge Langley District Judge

In Re Richard Lopez#l673749

5. Cause No. 09-04380-CRF-361-A

Richard Lopez, Relator § T.D.C.J. ID# 1673749 §

v. § IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL § APPEALS, AUSTIN, TEXAS. Judge Langley § 36lst District Judge Brazos, County, Texas § § § In her/his official Capacity § Respondant A. PLANTIFF' S ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SKID COURT: Comes now, Richard Lopez, Relator, pro-se in the above styles

and numbered cause of action and files this original application

for writ of mandamus, pursuant to article 11.07 sec. (c) of the

Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, and would show the court the

following:

B. RELATOR

1.01 Richard Lopez, TDCJ#1673749 is an offender incarcerated in the

Texas Department of Criminal Justice and is appearing pro-se; who

can be located at the Mark w~ Stiles Unit, Jefferson County, Texas

77705-7635.

1.02 Relator has exhausted his remedies and has no other adequate

remedy of law.

1.03 Relator has filed a motion for summary judgement on or about

Feb. 2016.

1.04 The act sought to be compelled is material, not discretionary

in nature.

6. T.C.C.P Art. 11.07

Section 3 (c) required the clerk to immediately transmit

to the Court of Criminal Appeals a copy of the application

for writ of Habeas Corpus, any answers filed, and a certificate

reciting the date upon which that finding was made, if the

convicting court decides that there are no issues to be

resolved no copy of the application for writ of Habeas Corpus

and answers, filed and certificate reciting the date upon

which that finding was made have been transmitted to the '

Court of Criminal Appea]_s ...

1.05 T.R.A.P. Rule 73(5)

For the trial courts, the rule changes impose a time limit

for resolving a 10.07 claim. Art. 11.07 does not place a

time limit on the court before these changes, once the

trial court signed an order designating issues (ODI) when

20 days of States deadline, there were no further deadlines.

The lack of firm deadlines has created concerns that some

trial courts were taking too long to resolve 11.07 claims.

The trial court had 180 days from the time the state recieved

the application to resolve the issues of the 11.07 writ

claims.

Put simply: • The State still has 15 days to respond.

• The trial court still has 20 days from the

States deadline to designate the issues.

• The trial court has 145 days (less than 5 months)

to order affidavits and/or hold a hearing, order 7. proposed findings of fact/conclusion of law and resolve issues. Because this is hard and fast

"lose jurisdiction, " kind of deadline. The State

should also have calendered the 180 days r~ make

sure there were no missed opportunities.

Under the new rule changes, the district clerk must send all

ODI'S to the Court of Criminal Appeals once signed by the trial

court.

STATEMENT QB CASE

The original Mandamus proceeding stems from a conviction for the

offense of aggravated sexual assault with a child and a sentence

of 35 years was imposed to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice

Institution on October 1,2010.

An application for writ of Habeas corpus was mailed on January

17,2014 to the 36lst Judicial District Court. To this date . relator has not recieved any notification that the court has . issued its finding of facts and conclusion of law after designating

that the ineffective assistance of counsel/conflict of interest

needed to be resolved. Sain order was made on Feb. 20, 2014, see

Exibit (D).

ISSUES TO BE PRESENTED

1) NegL~gence, in the perform~nce of the duties of his/her

office.

2) Failure of the presiding Judge (Langley) in the habeas proceeding

to make finding of facts and conclusion of law after timely

8. designating said issues, pursuant to Texas Rules of appellant

procedure, Rule 73. (5).

3) Failure to transmitt documents to the Court of triminal

Appeals as required by statute.

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

This court has jurisdiction over this mandamus proceeding under

Texas Government Code Section 22.221 and Texas Rule of Appellate

Procedure rule 52.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

On January 22,2014, relator filed his application for writ of I r .J

habeas corpus, pursuant to V.A.C.C.P. Art.11.07, with the 361st

judicial district court of Brazos county, Texas under cause no.

09-04380-CRF-361-A.

Relator raised three(3) grounds of error (1) Conflict of Interest.

(2) Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, ~3) Actual innocence.

On January 22, 2014 the district clerk of Brazos County, Texas

notified relator by letter that she had recieved and filed

relators application for writ of habeas corpus on that day,see

exibit (E-D).

On September 8,2014 after making several requests for a status

report regarding the progress of relators filed application, relator

again, provided another letter to the district emerk of Brazos

County Texas, informing her that he has not recieved any notice

wHether the court had issued an order to designate the ineffective

assistance of counsel issue, pursuant to Art.11.07§3(d), nor

had relator recieved any notice whether the court had issued or

9. recieved any affidavit(s) res.fx:m::3ingl to relator's allegations,

if such was designated, and or relator had not recieved any

notice/ruling from the Court of Oriminal Appeals re~arding his

filed application. As each time prior to said letter, the

district court failed to respond to relator's concerns for

his filed application.,see Exibit (B;E,A). Furthermore, relator

also filed a motion application for summary judgement in the

Court of Criminal Appeals Austin, Texas, on the first day of

March 2016, that also exceeded the 180th and 1 day allotted

see T.R.A.P. Rule 73 (5)see also exibit E with no response.

As mentioned, relator filed his application for writ of habeas

corpus (11.07) on Jan.22,2014 thus said wc~t:has been pending

in the 361st Judicial District Court for over twenty seven (27)

months with no proceeding as to finding of facts and conclusion

of law being performed by the honorable Judge Langley as

mandated by law. Furthermore, the time limitation of T.R.A.P.

Rule 73(5) to resolve said issues has expired.

ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIE-S

Once an application for writ of habeas corpus challenging a final

conviction is recieved and filed by the district court the

attorney representing the State is allowed (15) days in which

to respond, if he chooses to do so.,see V.A.d.c.P Art.11.07§3(d).

After the expiration of time for the State to answer, the trial

court is allowed(20) days in whd:ch to determine ~hetf-let="'-Uie'

application contains allegations of controverted, previously

unresolved issues material ·facts to the legality of the applicants 10. confinement, see V.A.C.C. Art. 11.07§3(c).

If the trial court determines the application does present

such issues (as required for relator's ineffective assistance

of counsel claim), it is the duty of the trial court to enter

an order within (20) day period, designating the issu~s of facts

to be resolved. After such issue's have been resolved pursuant

to V.A.C.C.P. Art.11.07§3(d), the clerk of the court must

~mmediately transfer the court findings etc., to the Texas Court

of Criminal Appeals fo~ final review and determination of the

designated~ issue(s) material to the legality of applicant's

confinement, see V.A.C.C.P. Art.ll.07§3{d); McCree v.Hamton,

824 S.W. 2d 578 (Tex.Crim, App.1992).

Although Art.11.07§3(d) does not specify a certain time period

in which a trial court must conduct the evidentiary proceedings

of Art 11.07§3{d), after the issue(s) were. designated, but Texas

rules of appellate procedure does require the trial Judge to

conduct these proceeding within 180 days from the date of

rec~ipt of the application, said rule state in part:

TIME FRAME FOR RESOLUTION OF CLAIMS RAISED IN APPLICATION

• Within 180 days from the date of receipt of the application

by the state. The convicting court shall resolve any issues

that the court has timely designated for resolution. Any

motion for extension of time must be filed in the Court of

Criminal Appeals before the expiration of the 180 day

period.,T.R.A.P. Rule 73(5).

11. • To obtain mandamus relief in a criminal matter, a '' relator must mket a two part test. First, relator must

show he has no other adequate rernMdy to seek redress for

the alleged error by the trial judge and second, the act

relator seeks to compel the trial Jud§e;.:· and second, the

act relator seeks to compel the trial judge to perform

must be ministerial in nature.

Failure to do either of these required showings will result

in denial of relief, see Board of Pardon and Parole vs.

Court of Criminal Appeals, 910 s.w. 2d 481,483 (Tex.Crim.

App. 1995).

• Texas law is well settled that mandamus will issue when

a trial judg~ fails to perform duties pursuant to V.A.C.C.P.

Art. 11.07§3{c) (d) and T.R.A.P. 73 (5) .Rule and upon

information and belief Jud§e Langley, has failed to perform

these duties. Relator has no adequate remedy to seek

redress for this error other than requesting this honorable

court to grant relief pursuant to his "writ of mandamus.~::

Relator has gone well beyond any requirement or obli§ation imposed

upon him by the Texas Code of .Criminal Procedure in contrast to

relator's efforts. Respondent has wholly failed to comply with

the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Art.11.07 Section 3 (c) (d)

and T.R.A.P. Rule 73 § (5). The trial court had 145 days (less

than five months) to order affidavits and/or hold a hearing,

order proposed findings of facts/ conclusions of law, and

resolve the issues. This is a hard and fast H"lose jurisdiction"

12. kind of deadline, the state is acting in bad faith, and has

violated relator's constitutional right to due process.

PR~Y,Ei{ FOR RELIEF

WHERE~~RE, premises considered:

Relator, Richard Lopez, Pro-se respectfully requests a

finding that the Honorable Judge Langly of the 36lst District

Court failed to resolve the issues that the court timely

desinated for resolution as required by T.R.A.P. Rule 73 (5)

and that relator is unaware that said Judge requested an extension

of time from this Honorable Court. Relator brought this

litigation in good faith and Has substantially prevail, relator

prays for order directing respondent to transmit copy of the

application for writ of habeas corpus, any answers filed, and

a certificate reciting the date upon which that finding was

made to section 3 (c) (d) of the Code of Criminal Appea~s

as directed procedure and pursuant to T.R.A,P, Rule 73 § (5).

13. DECLARATION

I, Richard Lopez, do declare under the penalty of perjury pursuant to Texas Cival Practice Remedies Code §132.001-§132.003, that the facts stated herein my writ of mandamus it true and correct.

of_~~--__ ,2016,

CE~TIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Richard Lopez, do certify that a true and correct copy of this writ was served on respondent by U.S. Mai lxpR]~ /address to: The Honorable Judge Langley 361st Judicial District Court Richard L pez, Brazos County, Texas Mark w. StLles 3060_FM 3514 Beaumont, Texas 77705

14.

=--==~-~-~,=== === ·-----------------~-~---=--=------=------~-----...::...-=-:---- ··----- St., Suite 1200 300 'E. 26'/i 'Brazos County 'Bryan 'IX 77803 (9~-361-4230-4240

:Marc Jfamfin 'District C{erfi ~-{A CA_)

.1~(5"

May 30,2014

Richard Lopez #0673749 Stiles Unit 3060 FM3514 Beaumont, TX 77705

Mr. Lopez,

Please find enclosed a copy of the Order dated 02/20114 from Judge Langley referncing the factual issues material to the legality of Applicant's Confinement.

I have also enclosed a file stamp copy of the letter dated April 29, 2014 that you filed at the District Clerk's office.

Thank You,

dt~JMoi Tracy Knighton Deputy Clerk District Clerk !"v1arc Hamlin 979-361-4233

Ref: Certified Receipt# 70133020000170070047 f: '){h. [SJ

l)ISTRICT CLERK·-· DA'zy:: 08.08. 2014 BRAZOS COUNTY 300 E. 26TH STREET, SUITE 1200 BRYAN, TEXAS 77083

RE: EX PARTE RICHARD C. LOPEZ CAUSE NO. 09-04380-CRF-361-A

Dear Sir/Madam:

Applicant in the above named and numbered Cause respectfully requests a Status Report of his said Writ of Habeas Corpus Art. 11.07 in that: 1) Applicant's first request has not been forwarded with response fcorrt the District Court Clerk to the Status of his State postconviction application pursuant to Art, 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, and

2) Whether a copy of Counsel Bruno Shimek's (Atty of Record) Affidavit, resp~nse to the allegations of Ineffective Assistance of Counsel/Conflict of Interest issues to the Defendant for purposes of protecting his right to Due Pro~ess and Rebuttal in a timely manner.

Please, Applicant respectfully requests that he be given Notice of the above and aforementioned so that a Writ of Mandamus does not issue. Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated.

cc:Applicant's File 2nd Request Sincerely,

62 ~f~~e Richard C. Lope'z TDCJ-CID #1673749 MARK STILES UNIT 3060 FM 3514 BEAUMONT, TEXAS 77705

-· ----------------- -- ----------------------------- ---- -- ··------~---------------------------------·-·------------------ - -- ---- - Exh. (C)

~~;-~~­ o,£/1~.~~ 3Po 67--: ~/# ~ S $ . /~O 6~/l-/l/> TP. 77 &tJe .

/(c,·· ore/~~ ~~zfo~ t!A+LJ'& /£!,.· c; 9 -_t7 crs&o - c,.er- ~St71--# . . -

j)~ S~/2?~~-·

~/?~~r-.a/~~t#7 ~~c4!/ /U/~d~ ~~~ ~~~~#-57?~~~~~.5~~ #F/~~~6~.-·//.. e!?/ 7//~~· _ _ !).. ~~~~~/~~'/9--~/fY . OF~~~ ('

(l~t7R/O./ss~~~~~~cf'~/~~ .27{.(_- ~~-~S~7?47V~/~#~&;e:-~~ 2_)....7#cT ttJ£!,p'~ $.~~/~~ ~~ CR.u/.e s~ -;2/ ~/if

··-

~~~-~kZ- . :mt!;T-7ZJ;;r/~ ?37?t'f ·- . #f~L- til ~ ~ &@t:> .~ &-/;/ - p~t!#JTP 777oT

t!c~- ~/~ . . /~~/t7JT

·- .. ( . . . . Exh. (D)

EX PARTE

§ BRAZOS COUNTY) TEXAS

RICHARD LOPEZ § 361 st JUDICIAL DISTRICT

ORDER

Pursuant to Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, §3(d), the Court is orthc opinion that controverted, previously unresolved factual issues materia] to the legality of Applicant's confinement exist. Therefore, the Court designates the following issues of fact to be resolved:

1. Ineffective assistance.

To assist the Court in resolving these factual issues, Bruno Shimek is ORDERED to fl.le an affidavit responding to the allegations contained in the application; said ani davit must be filed \vith the District Clerk ofBrazos County, Texas within 60 days of the signing ofthis Order.

The District Clerk is also ORDERED to send a copy of this Order to the following:

1. Bruno Shimek, 218 North Main, Bryan, TX 77803. ~ 2. Richard Lopez, TDCJ# 0673749,' Stiles Unit, 3060 FM 3514, Beaumont, TX 77705. 3. Brazos County District Attorney's Office.

The Court hereby ORDERS the District Clerk ofBrazos County to withhold preparing and transmitting the Record to the Court of Criminal Appeals until further Order of this rmurt ~- -· .f{. SIGNED the J::;> ..-day of _ __.:_Fa _ __,_._____, 2014.

M Presiding J udgc

3 f.i 7A1--L~, ffi:c_~ Lo?a wt ~ -xn.tt ~·1J'1f/~ fVl M.L W.. STILES lJAf IT :boLD Pm !1511 u-??~~fiT~"J ti!ttJT!JJA! fvL ~s LurM1lJ\ ~ r( il

YJE'A LJM Q)IJT J\tYtb l77!L6~ 7~:n j U~6 rlt1t:\{T

~lt:dLL. I ~r ~rL-r oC 122suv!;AI aL AR7£PL~ ?owkJ j_·L'!:Jv ~ ~Pn;L S'i. A u~l7 AI ~:X_ -:t1 5 ::n I

~~ Uflt{LT?; ~~~ LPa_ ~usc Al~. z:/J~'f:Jf3[yi!J..f-£,i~f1 __:c-u 77ff bLS TiP_u CcurU D i:; 2fLA2~~ l.L:t.Jr.ir( IEi~JS L l ~T iuJ)JLIAL £~<;. /flLLI

~EA~ t/E7Li: }J£J+St: ;;;)}j L~t:St:D off~ &Jf'/ vf lff~i_s_ nflnhu't! ha_ c__._jMfh~Y ~. uDGO c:JJj_ ;;L1jj /£' 1~L& l1!t _s Yl1t:.'716YJ ..:J:J.L "---(Jk- MD v£ uurn bEfLm Crus.~ ihtD biU::ML~ ..::n l1J '-Hk .4-rtD.t--n tM cor YHi: Ll.Du or; ~-r----UA-u!L Ybu h{L ltL Y&JL D~ 1LE iDe.~~· ~ · {/ 1 --rr... · \LE59ELT fuLLL[ ~ub M ,·TtW 1 IL~ L__) \Tl~ U-I~J I~~

J, LC! 1-~ )j[b)j(C 1-L)H_h~ 6?~~ 2- - -------.-~--- --~---.-~~~-~- ~-~-~~--·--···-~-~~---~~~-·~···~·-it~~------ L 1~ 11·h £'/It L6 ) ~ br t~~L ~Pftil~ idfq A: ll'ill;J ·-rr Xft s I

~ 8 .:5 n?~'Ltr ~ MLD Ltr? ~'t '-1-D6~.:r::J:~~ _l_\.of:\:2=> 1-49

''G)JL~urs I'Y16lltJ"f~{L~uMMLi ~u~~~~~

/h TJh:; J-hJJJ!LIJ~ jDD6£ u~ 5A:r-D f2.::JufLI:·

!Jbw ilD,21D R£J1tl.o Lnra~ u~P-PLu~Nr :r:f-1 -n-k Pr~~xllZ uu~L~mBJ flillJ'::.£ ~rn111h~ '/Jil;:tr715'1\ hL ~u1Ylh1 pJ},_y ~un6EJ¥1~ uHJ.f) W1ll 5~·-

~u~SE-L~ "'Dc:_tAvl-r otJ Ccuu D (L('J.EIL

APPLD.LJ\~ tt.!:.~CDLT~ ~1 !1/c, iLELdL/) L.-<-Jl{L ~lt fLe_tt Ytho.1: mxf kf!:Xw AILy 1-ill rY; Lb j_ --1 "Tll-t.J Jib AidL fr:M to u rcr b r ----r7-k .1 b1~ JtJ.D IL 11\J l JJLD111LI ~lcl bf J3£Z.A:tos C.OUrJfi.!llAs iD'PLD£ w~ D~uUl:J S 1Jrn1EJ!_'~ 4TL Df!Aci 1'\T lrto tt' f& !G-Al rfj ffj;JJ ~V;/ KESPtz>tJtJIAli, T'h llfz ~LLz_c;, ffrTtJ 1 ~~ CoriTPritJEJj_Il.L Ilk 14fPI oc (\-n~~ :S~1tJ /Jff;dAvzJ J1iulT 3-c TIL~::.1'J LviTJ/11-It i:J!.£1\UL( cJQlJL D~ 1~io~ Lout(.T'i /TlAi Lurrli.rAf /~r))j A

J7J ~~Ll~r-LGc fhvi !J~ 'rf+c I+PCL.rLfaLT~ ALL ~hA.Jb1J IL£6 vM_r];J~ DiE f;:zU! Vt 4SSrjTJtt.lu [)f !J;;;uilit-L C_WG~ '71:ht.E ~641/UJ~ --L::AlT!J ''J7JlTl111tUJ"J tJ bz(,' ~·1£,b YwA-L~LA-J.IttJ f'l .5 LJM ,21 l\.O~ <>~uCl6 a11 e:~1 hiL A?PL.u_~~xr r {

----------·----- :ILL 01/.~) ~b tJ.£0U0L b.E- -pQuL[ ~ul:lbEPiicNI 3oFf

~~ut)bQ\'\~t kiL nk ·uR#I r~ ~~T CL\lm\..~ !Dl\l ti:::\S_ Lt,-c-L\'\ n- f iYIL '--11~ .LLc-1\\.utLQnlt CwLr DILD~ ~\{ui~D Sftr;vtc: IL ,_ A-1\b\u.\c\ r::;q.1Lc-----n '---rb '-t-7 m~:_li A:~~t:L ,o(L b/Th__--L LD_I ~ l~ M [+ Lt:. S,!+ {i::) ~~~--~- Gm~\J 1\ w mt:t: \-l ClDb\ "'"~ \., ~h Lc u !11-\ "+fk btm_u_-r d lo)U(__ b~ ~b, '>, b~.t~:"' ~', , Sn Q~~-r}~ };L~ JIV b . 14- -~ u rY1 ffiACL ~ -~t_)[k;£M L--->JT w (r1f 111-t: Llcalr of L1uA I 1\J j/1 L wb'f+L~ r 4~ tLkiA --r7f-ewl 7JJ TJ+L~ ~ uf)1aJ1 L 4c!7M k!L J!k: iLuL ~ull1~ LQLL b f' cluD£rlluf( ~- Su1Mifj (tLEIIiLlS IJ?671tY!J HJ U !11 b 11s, ., ----rb \0 LL be_if£' ---rt1r tJ J4TZJ lLE tJ '-n71_j ' IliaTltY! r-:dz_ s LJ/JJ fr/,4-rzJlJ~~n1ed

MPLa..JuJ1~ :Ls. fJCL£JrA!n/lJti Y-flz-.J IYJ[jjJM ~ 6£Dfl ;;;J!/J A ILU.:J .::::r:-J\l '-rtf£ _l i£-rLEJ T LJI' =-L:.Ji 77L'u-.

~p{Jl_u__?rJT) ?CLALJs.. ---r-I-1-d J.llJLl!UltL~ Loun:r -r,uo A-P7~ur~ ~ tut.~ \ ~ ~u; h!l_fY' \~.D mLI ~hl..D CCLA~ A-qqLLL_~ 1'\~ N\bllGT\ ~(L c~wfl". ff\{\(Llf ~U-~bff\DJ\ .::!::-~ ~ 1 \!1\f\0-rtC{\_ ·

'1 n . r)_ · _:[_, ~ia_l\AJtO La9a \ J.~ lh.-rJoY dscJ~lc: uiJOaL (E?J~LTi [J t- l~LJ(Ll{ ~u\Lju/+ill h, ~.. uJ, {,f}J)L, b.LJ)Jl;_~ J..;)2...tJbi-~L~1..ht6> TtJ-v+'-t H-LL L.ortli!4uJ~::,n lta. f:cl·{ D ~t:: A--~ GO Or---t-r ID!1k 6~-r D f:: rn y UtJ~51L~mJ\I~~_\/:D

01ULm::u 'DM. '11Jr~.jc)~~ wf rJ ~6d;1-/{'( l6l Lc. {2__,dtnrt L f\.T£ t:J ~ ~ tl.VJLS :I.,~ L~GIJ JD \hLt:lY (I y-,fL'r....Dr..i -n-h4-1 A-tLIJt.. ~ND ~6 Q..dy 'Df--nf-r A-~D~b ~UD ~l.LGanl& A-PP~~t\ Mill~ h:fL ~...ltY\(Y\.IkL £'( J.\J\\b( fvtc:hl\ 1-N\~( 6~ )Fi_LfED . b ~ Ap="·~~~· Tt, \{-, l'-r-..\.\ ~~ r ~~?\ L./l )\ --J-.1 ~·~~ c....l-N w ~L- ............~"" ,. . ,___.. . . .____ r '--n, J nc UlJrlt.O ~1!+/t;_j

-;c _____ -==c.·-,,J/'u!\.:iL __.{j__JLJ.~~-S.SJ;-=i)=~-:_--=--=- . ---=,.,==c==c==--=o - - --· .. ~MD ~Pct ~~-~ ~b i_b.1J9-J-}1 h1 AILlC_ W.. ~h) ES U'Jl> r ~D~O tfh j51_J-j bL ltU 11'1:b~r~ ft.'QK i-+1-lYS-1fc)s