.; Dr. Alex Melvin Wade, Jr. -~~ ~ ~ Paralegal Specialist Mark W. Stiles
B;:§;;nf%`z:::$ F§E§:;§§HAIE§EY g mm @OURTO:FCR:MJNA:L mms JUN 01 2035
May 27th/ 2015
. d@@l%l@@s?@,©l@ref
The Honorable Abel Acosta Clerk ,
Court of Criminal Appeals P.o. Boc 12308
Capitol Station
Austin, Texas 78711-0308 ““
Ref.t Ex Parte Alex Melvin Wade, jr., a/k/a Alex Wade, Jr., Trial Court # 729,136-G, In the l79th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas WR-65,555-18
Dear Mr. Abel:
Under your cover letter dated April 24th, 2015, this Applicant was returned various documents submitted to that court causing the record is the lower
court be modified showing documents this court should be abreast of. The documents were caused to be manilated from the record based on a proposed
order of the Office of Devon Anderson, District Attorney, via., Of Linda Garcia, Assistant District Attorney.
Your cover letter advised this Applicant, that your office did not have a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals at that time. This Applicant notified by "white card," dated May 6th, 2015, your office had in fact _received the Writ of Habeas Corpus these enclosed documents were to be made a _ part of if the Clerk of the Harris County, Texas Office has not transmitted the same to your office.
As such, I am herewith returning the file returned to me again back to your Office to be attached to the record in the above entitled cause of action.
The "Nunc Pro Tunc/" allegedly not filed in the l79th District Court and is based on the proposed Order signed by the Habeas Court has been attached to show the reason the Order is based on is because of an incompleteness of the record.
I hope some favo able action proceed on your parts, in submitting these documents to the' Court or review,'whcih will show the propsed order was designed to cause fh~
Dr diex Melvin Wade, Jr.
Abel Acosta WR-65,555-18 Page two (2) May 27th, 2015
CC: . Linda Garcia, Asst. District Atty c/o Devon Anderson, District Attorney vHarris`County Courthouse
1201 Franklin Street, 6th Fl. Houston, Téxas 77002
enC 7
Dr. Alex Melvin Wade, Jr. Paralegal Specialist Mark N. Stiles 3060 FM 3514 Beaumont, Texas 77705-7638
March 10th/ 2015
Abel Acosta,
Clerk
Court of Criminal Appeal Capitol Station
P.D. Box 12308
Au$tin, Texas 78711-2308
Ref.: Ex Parte Alex Melvin Wade, Jr., Cause number 729,136~0, in the l79th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas,`Presiding R.Royce.
Dear Mr= Acosta:
Enclosed herewith please find a copy of Applicant's Alex Melvin Wade, Jr.,'s Response to the State's Original Answer with the attached proposed order. In ny previous communication with the Harris County,’Texas Courtsi the Orders drafted by the State's District Attorney's Office in matters of this sort
are signed and forwarded to your office before the Applicant can respond to
the State’s Driginal Answ=r.
Therefore; § am forwarding your Office a copy_of the enclosed pleading to be
Mmade a part of the record presented to your office by t e_Clerk of Harris County, Texas Chris daniel's Office;
"I believe the Order proposed by the Stata do not mention the attached doaaments that should be a part of the record in this habeas corpus proceeding» The
"Nunc Pro Tunc," filed where no action was taken by the Court is highly rem lenavt and should'not be suppressed in the habeas corpus record in this cause
of action1 The Pleading herein contain documents from the Clerk Office
that with little, if any investigation availed these documents that is al-
leged not file in the Diatrict Court, respectively.
I hope some favorab;e action proceed on your parts, in having the ex~ hibit efore the Court for review.
/'E,;§£Ention in the handling of this matter..
Linda Gai ia _Asst. District Attorney
,...`/,_.i i ...`. ....,
Dr. Alex Melvin Wade, Jr. Paralegal Specialist' Mark W¢ Stile
3060 FM'3514
Beaumont, Texas 77705~7638
Cause No.: 729,13§:6
IN THE l79th DISTRICT COURT EX PARTE
OF
ALEX MELVIN WADE/ JR./ Applicant.
¢»O‘>¢»OQY»O’J¢OS¢O)¢O¢¢
HARRIS COUNTY/'T E X A S
APPLICANT ALEX MELVIN WADE/ JR.;'S RESPONSE TO`STATE'S ORIGINAL ANSWER /
IO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COMES NOW, Alex Melvin Wade, Jr., pro se, in the above-entitled cause of ac ion, brought pursuant to Tex.Code=Crim.Procedure art, 11.07(West 2013) and would show the following: n
ID
Applicant was arrested in 1992 in connection with the above entitled . cause number(the_primary case) 729,136, however; applicant was convicted in 1997. Applicant was placed in clstody on different dates and time prior the the conviction of 1997 of forgery. The trial court assessed the applicant's punishment, enhanced by one (l) prior convictiou, at twenty year (20) confine~ ment in the Toxas Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division (TDCJ-ID) and a tenethousand dollar ($10,000}fine.
The trial court did not credit Applicant with.time spend in custody on the offense. Applicant has filed several "Nunc Pro Tunc," proceeding
to cause the judgment and.sentence be correcteda
II.
Applicant Alex Melvin Wade, Jr, support with evidence the Court's Clerk record will show that Applicant has filed "Nunc Pro Tunc," a proceed~ ing the Office of Devon.Anderson, District Attorney alleges has not been filed in it's answer. however{, with just the miminum of investigation by the Office of Devon Anderson, with the availability of technology with just a simple phone call would have produce a copy of "MEMORANDUM RESPONSE TO OORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED: 3/20/2014, in this primary cause number 729/136, Applicant’s Motion Nunc Pro Tunc was filed with the District Clerk and on`B/27/l4, took no action. The action show that the court provided no credit for time spent in custody in connection with the offense before 9/26/19950 In the event the court fail, as it has done here fails to award such credit at the time of the sentence is imposed, the court has the authority to correct the judgment to reflect the appropriate time credit by nunc pro tunc." This is the precise action that was.taken by Applicant (See Ekhibit "A") Tex. l R.App, Rule 23.2. However, the Court of Appeals has held that the action taken by.Applicant is the appropriate remedy, tNunc Pro Tunci: prior to the filing of the habeas corpus in the primary case. Ex parte Ybarra, 149_S.W.3d 147, 148(Tex.Crivapp. 2004); citing Ex parte Pena, 71 S.W.3d 336, 336 (Tex. Crim» App. 2002) See pg" 3 of State's`Original Answer.
III.
Applicant raises questions of law and fact that can not be resolved by the Court of Criminal Appeals upon review of official court records and with need far evidentiary.
The Office.of Devon Anderson¢ District Attorney, know that the "Nunc Pro Tunci" will not show in the habeas record and the official Clerk would
reveal the filing of Applicant's Nunc Pro Tenc.", respectively.
IV. Applicant contends he is being prejudiced by not being granted his jail
time credit, because.that jail time credit would entitled applicant to have
se;ved and discahrged ;he sentence along with his time spent in his parole
status on the sentence imposed in 1997 in this primary case.
V.
For the foregoing reasons; and supported by the evidence herein, clerk's
"Nunc Pro Tunc," before the filing
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
.; Dr. Alex Melvin Wade, Jr. -~~ ~ ~ Paralegal Specialist Mark W. Stiles
B;:§;;nf%`z:::$ F§E§:;§§HAIE§EY g mm @OURTO:FCR:MJNA:L mms JUN 01 2035
May 27th/ 2015
. d@@l%l@@s?@,©l@ref
The Honorable Abel Acosta Clerk ,
Court of Criminal Appeals P.o. Boc 12308
Capitol Station
Austin, Texas 78711-0308 ““
Ref.t Ex Parte Alex Melvin Wade, jr., a/k/a Alex Wade, Jr., Trial Court # 729,136-G, In the l79th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas WR-65,555-18
Dear Mr. Abel:
Under your cover letter dated April 24th, 2015, this Applicant was returned various documents submitted to that court causing the record is the lower
court be modified showing documents this court should be abreast of. The documents were caused to be manilated from the record based on a proposed
order of the Office of Devon Anderson, District Attorney, via., Of Linda Garcia, Assistant District Attorney.
Your cover letter advised this Applicant, that your office did not have a Writ of Habeas Corpus filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals at that time. This Applicant notified by "white card," dated May 6th, 2015, your office had in fact _received the Writ of Habeas Corpus these enclosed documents were to be made a _ part of if the Clerk of the Harris County, Texas Office has not transmitted the same to your office.
As such, I am herewith returning the file returned to me again back to your Office to be attached to the record in the above entitled cause of action.
The "Nunc Pro Tunc/" allegedly not filed in the l79th District Court and is based on the proposed Order signed by the Habeas Court has been attached to show the reason the Order is based on is because of an incompleteness of the record.
I hope some favo able action proceed on your parts, in submitting these documents to the' Court or review,'whcih will show the propsed order was designed to cause fh~
Dr diex Melvin Wade, Jr.
Abel Acosta WR-65,555-18 Page two (2) May 27th, 2015
CC: . Linda Garcia, Asst. District Atty c/o Devon Anderson, District Attorney vHarris`County Courthouse
1201 Franklin Street, 6th Fl. Houston, Téxas 77002
enC 7
Dr. Alex Melvin Wade, Jr. Paralegal Specialist Mark N. Stiles 3060 FM 3514 Beaumont, Texas 77705-7638
March 10th/ 2015
Abel Acosta,
Clerk
Court of Criminal Appeal Capitol Station
P.D. Box 12308
Au$tin, Texas 78711-2308
Ref.: Ex Parte Alex Melvin Wade, Jr., Cause number 729,136~0, in the l79th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Texas,`Presiding R.Royce.
Dear Mr= Acosta:
Enclosed herewith please find a copy of Applicant's Alex Melvin Wade, Jr.,'s Response to the State's Original Answer with the attached proposed order. In ny previous communication with the Harris County,’Texas Courtsi the Orders drafted by the State's District Attorney's Office in matters of this sort
are signed and forwarded to your office before the Applicant can respond to
the State’s Driginal Answ=r.
Therefore; § am forwarding your Office a copy_of the enclosed pleading to be
Mmade a part of the record presented to your office by t e_Clerk of Harris County, Texas Chris daniel's Office;
"I believe the Order proposed by the Stata do not mention the attached doaaments that should be a part of the record in this habeas corpus proceeding» The
"Nunc Pro Tunc," filed where no action was taken by the Court is highly rem lenavt and should'not be suppressed in the habeas corpus record in this cause
of action1 The Pleading herein contain documents from the Clerk Office
that with little, if any investigation availed these documents that is al-
leged not file in the Diatrict Court, respectively.
I hope some favorab;e action proceed on your parts, in having the ex~ hibit efore the Court for review.
/'E,;§£Ention in the handling of this matter..
Linda Gai ia _Asst. District Attorney
,...`/,_.i i ...`. ....,
Dr. Alex Melvin Wade, Jr. Paralegal Specialist' Mark W¢ Stile
3060 FM'3514
Beaumont, Texas 77705~7638
Cause No.: 729,13§:6
IN THE l79th DISTRICT COURT EX PARTE
OF
ALEX MELVIN WADE/ JR./ Applicant.
¢»O‘>¢»OQY»O’J¢OS¢O)¢O¢¢
HARRIS COUNTY/'T E X A S
APPLICANT ALEX MELVIN WADE/ JR.;'S RESPONSE TO`STATE'S ORIGINAL ANSWER /
IO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COMES NOW, Alex Melvin Wade, Jr., pro se, in the above-entitled cause of ac ion, brought pursuant to Tex.Code=Crim.Procedure art, 11.07(West 2013) and would show the following: n
ID
Applicant was arrested in 1992 in connection with the above entitled . cause number(the_primary case) 729,136, however; applicant was convicted in 1997. Applicant was placed in clstody on different dates and time prior the the conviction of 1997 of forgery. The trial court assessed the applicant's punishment, enhanced by one (l) prior convictiou, at twenty year (20) confine~ ment in the Toxas Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division (TDCJ-ID) and a tenethousand dollar ($10,000}fine.
The trial court did not credit Applicant with.time spend in custody on the offense. Applicant has filed several "Nunc Pro Tunc," proceeding
to cause the judgment and.sentence be correcteda
II.
Applicant Alex Melvin Wade, Jr, support with evidence the Court's Clerk record will show that Applicant has filed "Nunc Pro Tunc," a proceed~ ing the Office of Devon.Anderson, District Attorney alleges has not been filed in it's answer. however{, with just the miminum of investigation by the Office of Devon Anderson, with the availability of technology with just a simple phone call would have produce a copy of "MEMORANDUM RESPONSE TO OORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED: 3/20/2014, in this primary cause number 729/136, Applicant’s Motion Nunc Pro Tunc was filed with the District Clerk and on`B/27/l4, took no action. The action show that the court provided no credit for time spent in custody in connection with the offense before 9/26/19950 In the event the court fail, as it has done here fails to award such credit at the time of the sentence is imposed, the court has the authority to correct the judgment to reflect the appropriate time credit by nunc pro tunc." This is the precise action that was.taken by Applicant (See Ekhibit "A") Tex. l R.App, Rule 23.2. However, the Court of Appeals has held that the action taken by.Applicant is the appropriate remedy, tNunc Pro Tunci: prior to the filing of the habeas corpus in the primary case. Ex parte Ybarra, 149_S.W.3d 147, 148(Tex.Crivapp. 2004); citing Ex parte Pena, 71 S.W.3d 336, 336 (Tex. Crim» App. 2002) See pg" 3 of State's`Original Answer.
III.
Applicant raises questions of law and fact that can not be resolved by the Court of Criminal Appeals upon review of official court records and with need far evidentiary.
The Office.of Devon Anderson¢ District Attorney, know that the "Nunc Pro Tunci" will not show in the habeas record and the official Clerk would
reveal the filing of Applicant's Nunc Pro Tenc.", respectively.
IV. Applicant contends he is being prejudiced by not being granted his jail
time credit, because.that jail time credit would entitled applicant to have
se;ved and discahrged ;he sentence along with his time spent in his parole
status on the sentence imposed in 1997 in this primary case.
V.
For the foregoing reasons; and supported by the evidence herein, clerk's
"Nunc Pro Tunc," before the filing
record, "Applicant"filed the required of the-habeas corpus in the above entitled-cause of action ending with "G".
The State's Original Answer be herein overruled as a matter of law.
VI.
Service has been'accomolished by sending a copy of this instrument to
the following:
Abel Costa Clerk, Court of Appeals
P .O. Bo);12308 Capitol >ta“ion
/'Z.(éX 55
Linda Garcia
Assistant District Attorney Harris County, Texas
1201 Franklin Street, Suite 600 Beaumont, Texas 77705-7633
SIGNED this 04/09/15
E'>a/,i”alegal Spec'iali at Mér k W. Stiles" /3060 FM 3514 yBeaumont Texas 77705
v l. It appears the Office of De'-.on A'.'d.\rsm, ll‘.strict Attorney for Harris nd/ 2013_5, the Horr)rable Bildwin Giin, A“sistant District Attorney filed State's :"bti).'x Requestirg Dasigrmtim of an Iss.le. (See Applicant's Exhibit "B", pcp 1~4) flhis dx:'mit shqzld have
bnaltrmrmitted hoiie<&lmt ofihqx§ds asgznt ofthe}r%res om;us nezmd.
4}.
CHRIS DA_NIEL
HARRIS COUNTY l)lSTRlCT CLERK v _ Direct Dial Line:
Alex M. Wade, Jr
1624189
Mark W. Stiles
3060 FM 3514
Beaumont, TX 77705-7638
Memorandum response to correspondence received: 3/20/2014 Re: Cause No(s) 729]36.
Dear Mr. Wade,
§ Your motion/request Nunc Pro Tunc Was filed with the District Clerk and on 8/27/14 the Court:
§ Took no action I:] Denied your Motion/Request l:l Granted your motion/request
[:l Took action [:l Advised attorney ofrecord IZ Other
ix Our records reflect your jail time credit to be at the time of sentence: 9/26/1996 to~~’ _. 4/30/1997. Although sentence imposed date is 4/30/1997, the actual sentence to begin date is 9/29/1996. Judgment reflects no error.
ij
Contact TDC records for further information.
[:I Requests for certified copies: |:] P!-cssc include full neme, date of.birth, ami/or cause number
I:l Co‘p'ies must be ordered by document name for correspondence to determine how many pages, to be able to quote a price. The fee for certified or uncertified copies is $l.00 per page. Al| requests must include a self-addressed, stamped envelope. lfthe cause number is not known, there will be
a record search fee of $5.00.
APPL_T_CAN'I"S EXHIBIT "A" l Of 3
l, ,' ................. Q 'th l_(?9th "\‘I)lstrlct Court
P.O. Box 465| o HOUSTON_ TEXAS 77210-465| o (713) 755-5749
Dr..Alex Melvin Wade, Jr. Paralegal Specialist
Mark W. St-i l es
Beaument, Texas 77705~7638
cause No','-: 7291\36
S'IATE OF 'i‘EXAS/' ' § IN. THE l79th JIIDICIAL_ DISTRICT COURT § - 1 vs. § OF' . ` - - § ALEX-. MELVIN WA'DE, 'JR. , §
Defendant. ‘ ll ` § HARRIS COUNTY, T E X A S DEFENDANT"S THIRD NUNC PRO TUNC n v Defendant Alex Melvin Wade,lJr.,-pro se herein and pursuant to Rule 23.2, Texass Rules'nf”Appellate'§rocedure, where the trial court has the
authoritv to correa ;.i;he judgment to reflect the appropriate sentence by
"nunc pro tunc/V azid grant Defendant with presentence jail credit when the sentence is prenounced-. Texas.€ode Criminal Proednre Article 42.03 §Z(a) This Defenda;it seekes to cause the churt to correct the sentence and provide
his with the appropriate pre-sentence credit for good cause as in the fol-
"lowing; ““ I. The certified c:opy of: the Judgment and Comnittment Order dated` August 7th, 2014, issues by Js :icsk, Dsputy. ' .The Onier show the date`Offense'Gammitted, 4-9-19©9- The Clerk's RecOrd
`heuld show Defendant was held in leiu of $250, 000 OO(Two Hundred Fifty
4§
l\) 0
m w
w correct.cOpY tht e ioreqoi q "Nunc Pro Tunc,”.has'this
"Countv, District Attorney,-l?® 1
» Defendant was_retained in the Marion;€ountv Jail, Indianapolis Indiana and held for the purpose of‘axtridication. Defendant was release on bail to a State Bonding Company and was rearrested and held.in the-Marion County
Jail awaiting extridiction to Harris.Countv,‘Texas on the instant offense
'in the.indictment.numberedr79@rl36'for.a period`of 30 days and is entitled
»to.credit for the time spent in custody in correction with the instant offense. pursuant to 43.3.¢2(a)y CCPe:respectivelv»
'T` l _ , coucLus'IoN‘
WhereforeL:Defendant Alex Melvin_Wader Jr,/…pravsy that uoon this Court investigation of the above time anent in custody by Defendant-on the instant offense, credit his sentence with IR§ days time spent in custody in correction
with the instant offense.
cause all interested partiesvaDCJ=C D and Texas Board of Pardons &
lvi na . )cialist
tark'W.'Stiles
Q' Beaumont, Texas 77705-7638
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE._ 4
I, Dr. Alex Melvin-Wade, Jr., pro se herein herebv certifv a true and
' z'o
.Day of September
on, Harris
77002, postage prepaid.
NO. 729136-G
E)< PARTE § iN THE 179TH oisTRicT couRT
§ oi= ALE)< MEL\/iuv\/ADE, JR.,
Appiicant b § HARR|S COUNTY, TEXAS
STATE’S MOT|ON REQUES'T|NG DES|GNAT|ON OF AN |SSUE
'1'|.'.. 0.|...;,` A£ TA\,AA law nr"-J +ln»-A»'r_uln_ i~l-¢~ l\¢~c~ie+ar\'l- nic~+rir\+ l.\‘l+r\rhc\l 'Fnr
Harris County, requests that this Court, pursuant to TE)<. CRir\/i. PRoc. CoDE ANN. art. 11.07, § 3(d) (West Supp. 2013), designate the issue of Whether
the applicant Was denied pre-sentence jail credits as the issue Which needs
to be resolved in the above captioned cause.
EXHIEH"'B", lof-4
Service has been accomplished by mailing a copy of the State’s
l\/|otion Requesting Designation of an lssue and Proposed Order
Designating an issue to:
Alex l\/lelvin Wade, Jr. 16241'89
Stiles Unit
3060 Fl\/l 3514 Beaumont, Texas 77705
S|GNED this Z“d day of January, 2015,
submitted,
Assistant istrictAttorney Harris County, Texas 1201 Frank|in, Suite 600 ' Houston,'T§$ias 77002 (713) 755-6657 Texas Bar l.D. #00783823
E`XI‘EBI'I' B, 2 05 4
NO. 729136-(3
E)< _PARTE § 1N THE 179TH oisTRicT couRT § oF
ALEX MELviN v\/ADE, JR., Appiicant § HARRis couNTY, TEXAS
STATE’S PROPOSED ORDER DES|GNAT|NG AN lSSUE
Having reviewed the.application for Writ of habeas corpus, the Court finds that the issue of Whether the applicant Was denied pre-sentence jail credits needs to be resolved
Therefore, pursuant to Article 11.07, § 3(d),_ this Court will resolve the above-cited issue and then enter findings of fact.
The Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to transmit the Court”s instant Orsi.sr§§§isn@ting issues tests Csuft Of mistrial Appei'§- The C'er*:€itt‘e Court is ORDERED NOT to transmit any additional do-cuments`in the
above-styled case to the Court of Crimina| Appea|s until further ordered by
this Court
EXI~HBIT "_'H", 3 05 4
By the following signature, the Court adopts the State’s Proposed Order-Designating an lssue in Cause Number 729136-6.
S|GNED on the day of , 2015.
?s? mtcmz\r. sir-tro ay ms PRES|D|NG JUDGE, 179TH DlSTRlCT COURT
HARR|S COUNTY, TEXAS
,,,,,,,
EX PARTE ,§, b IN THE 179TH DISTRICT COURT § oF ALEX MELVIN WADE, § HARRIS CoUNTY, TEXAS Applicant
STATE’S ORIGINAL ANSWER AThe State of Texas, by'and throughits Assistant District Attorney for Harris County, files this, its original answer in the above-captioned cause, having been served with the original application for writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07 (West 2013), and would show the following: 4 ' I.
The applicant is confined pursuant to the judgment and sentence of the 179&‘- District Court of Harris County, Texas, in cause number 729136 (the primary case), where the applicant was convicted on April 30, 1991 by a jury of the felony offense of forgery. The court assessed the applicant’s punishment, enhanced by one (1) prior conviction, at twenty (20) years confinement in the Texas Department' of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division (TDCJ-ID) and a ten-thousand dollar ($10,000) fine.
The First Court of Appeals delivered an opinion affirming the applicant’s conviction on October 12, 2000. Wade v. State, No. 01-97-00904-CR, 31 S.W.3d _
723, (Tex. App._Houston [lSt Dist.], pet. ref’d).
The applicant’s previous applications for Writ of habeas corpus, cause numbers 729136-A, 729136-€, were denied on November 1, 2006 and April 29, 2009, respectively. The applicant’s previous applicants for writ of habeas corpus, cause numbers 729136-B, 729136-D, 729136-E, 729136-F, Were denied on February 25, 2009, October 02, 2013, January 22, 2014, and October 15, 2014, respectively
The State denies the factual allegations /made in the instant application, except those supported by official court records, and offers the following additional reply:
REPLY To APPLICANT’S SOLE GROUND FoR RELIEF j The applicant alleges'in his sole ground for relief that he is being denied pre- conviction time credits against his sentence in the primary case. See Applicant’s Writ at 6. Specifically, the applicant makes various claims that he is entitled to ' credit against his sentence in the primary case for the times that he was either arrested or transported until the time he was found guilty by ajury. Ia’.
The trial court is required to grant the applicant pre-sentence jail time credit When the sentence is pronounced TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art 42.03 §Z(a). In the event the court fails to award such credit at the time the sentence is imposed, the trial court has the authority to correct the judgment to reflect the appropriate time
credit by nunc pro tunc order. TEX. R. APP. P. Rule 23.2. However, the Court of
Criminal Appeals has held that matters which may be raised and resolved by nunc pro tunc proceedings should not be considered by way of writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Ybarra, 149 S.W.3d 147, 148 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004); citing Ex parte Pena, 71 S.W.3d 336, 336-176 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002)(holding that claim that judgment is inaccurate, which is neither claim of jurisdictional defect nor violation ' of constitutional or fundamental rights, is not basis for habeas relief under TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07); Ex parte Patterson, 139 Tex. Crim. 489, 496, 141 S.W.Zd 319, 323 (1940)(mere irregularity in judgment may be corrected by nunc pro tunc proceeding, but was not subject for granting Writ of habeas corpus)(citing Ex parte Beeler, 41 TeX. Crim. 240, 241, 53 S.W. 857, 857 (1899)).
The applicant’s instant claim is not the proper subject for habeas corpus relief. The applicant’s appropriate remedy is to present the issue to the trial court by way of a nunc pro tunc motion. Therefore, the applicant’s instant writ should b_e dismissed
The applicant raises questions of law and fact that can be resolved by the
Court of Criminal Appeals upon review of official court records and without need
for an evidentiary hearing.
IV.
Service has been accomplished by sending a copy of this instrument to the
following address: .
Alex Melvin Wade
TDCJ #1624189 - Mark W. Stiles
3060 FM 3514 Beaumont, TeXas 77705
SIG_NED this 27th day of March, 2015,
Res`pectfully submitted,
Assistant District Attorney Harris County, Texas ' 1201 Franklin, Suite 600 Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 755-6657 Texas Bar I.D. #00787163
Prepared by: J osh Redelman - Intern
Certificate of Compliance as Re_quired by Tex. R. App. 73.1(![
The State of Texas, through its Assistant District Attorney for Harris County, files this, its Certificate of Compliance in the above-captioned cause, having been served with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Tex. Crim. Proc. Code art. 11.07 § 3. The State certifiesthat the number of words in- the
_ State’s Answer is 749.