Prystash, Joseph Andrew

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Prystash, Joseph Andrew

DecidedDecember 17, 2008

DocketWR-58,537-02

StatusPublished

This text of Prystash, Joseph Andrew (Prystash, Joseph Andrew) 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

Prystash, Joseph Andrew, (Tex. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-58,537-02 EX PARTE JOSEPH ANDREW PRYSTASH

ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 723036 IN THE 230^TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

HARRIS COUNTY

Per Curiam.

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.

Applicant was convicted of capital murder on July 9, 1996. The jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 37.071, and the trial court sentenced applicant to death. This Court affirmed applicant's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Prystash v. State, 3 S.W.3d 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). On October 15, 1998, Applicant filed his initial post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.071. We denied relief. Ex parte Prystash, No. WR-58,537-01 (Tex. Crim. App. April 28, 2004) (not designated for publication). Applicant then filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus. The federal district court found that several claims in that petition were unexhausted, and stayed federal proceedings in order to allow applicant to seek state court review of those claims. Prystash v. Quarterman, 2006 WL 2479094 (S.D. Tex. August 25, 2006) (not designated for publication).

Applicant presents four allegations. We have reviewed the application and find that part of allegation one - applicant's claim that the State suppressed evidence with respect to the voluntariness of his co-defendant's confession - satisfies the requirements of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, Sec. 5(a). Accordingly, as to that claim, we find that the requirements for consideration of a subsequent application have been met and the cause is remanded to the trial court for consideration.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 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Do Not Publish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-58,537-02 EX PARTE JOSEPH ANDREW PRYSTASH

ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 723036 IN THE 230^TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

HARRIS COUNTY

Per Curiam.

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.

Applicant was convicted of capital murder on July 9, 1996. The jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 37.071, and the trial court sentenced applicant to death. This Court affirmed applicant's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Prystash v. State, 3 S.W.3d 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). On October 15, 1998, Applicant filed his initial post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.071. We denied relief. Ex parte Prystash, No. WR-58,537-01 (Tex. Crim. App. April 28, 2004) (not designated for publication). Applicant then filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus. The federal district court found that several claims in that petition were unexhausted, and stayed federal proceedings in order to allow applicant to seek state court review of those claims. Prystash v. Quarterman, 2006 WL 2479094 (S.D. Tex. August 25, 2006) (not designated for publication).

Applicant presents four allegations. We have reviewed the application and find that part of allegation one - applicant's claim that the State suppressed evidence with respect to the voluntariness of his co-defendant's confession - satisfies the requirements of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, Sec. 5(a). Accordingly, as to that claim, we find that the requirements for consideration of a subsequent application have been met and the cause is remanded to the trial court for consideration.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2008.

Do Not Publish

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Prystash, Joseph Andrew, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prystash-joseph-andrew-texcrimapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack