Williams, Clifton

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 19, 2015
DocketAP-75,541
StatusPublished

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

Bluebook
Williams, Clifton, (Tex. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

'*>

FU FD CAUSE NUMBER 114-~1505-06 PAGE j*h« • * ? .•*• •*

LOIS ROGERS v^S^ CLERK OPTHEJbffltGQU£% SMITH CO-1X W. VAV DEPUTY ...

CAUSE NO. 114-1505-06

STATE OF TEXAS IN THE 114TH DISTRICT

VS COURT IN AND FOR

CLIFTON WILLIAMS X SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS Capital Murder, Capital Felony RECEIVED IN as charged in the Indictment ncwuvcu m COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS FORMAL SENTENCING .. |M -„mr PURSUANT TO MANDATE FROM TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAES" ^ 'U'3 ORDER SETTING DATE OF EXECUTION ORDER FOR ISSUANCE OF WARRANT OF EXECUTION fi^kBO^ClBlk JUDGMENT

JUDGE PRESIDING AT TRIAL: Date originally sentenced CYNTHIA STEVENS KENT and Judgment: October 13, 2006

JUDGE PRESIDING AT FORMAL Date of formal, sentencing SENTENCING: upon Mandate affirming CHRISTI KENNEDY case and Order Denying 11.071 State Writ: March 18, 2009

Date of re-sentehcing following denial of federal habeas corpus relief: June 4, 2015

ATTORNEY FOR STATE: ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT AT TRIAL: MATT BINGHAM MELVIN THOMPSON APRIL SIKES LAJUANDA LACY ATTORNEY ON DIRECT APPEAL: STEPHEN EVANS TONDA CURRY ATTORNEY ON 11.071 STATE WRIT: JEFF HAAS

CERTIFIED TO BE ATFUE AND CORRECT COPY FILED IN THE SMITH COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE CAUSE NUMBER 114-81505-06 PAGE

ATTORNEYS ON FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS WRIT SETH KRETZER JAMES W. VOLBERDING

ATTORNEY AT FINAL SENTENCING FOLLOWING DENIAL OF FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS RELIEF: JAMES W. HUGGLER

OFFENSE CHARGED': CAPITAL MURDER DATE OFFENSE CONVICTED OF: CAPITAL. MURDER COMMITTED JULY 9. 2005 DEGREE: CAPITAL FELONY

CHARGING INSTRUMENT: INDICTMENT PLEA: NOT GUILTY TERMS OF PLEA BARGAIN NONE

DATE SENTENCE FORMALLY PRONOUNCED AND IMPOSED: OCTOBER 13. 2006 COSTS: $550.00

Date Sentence Formally Pronounced following Mandate from Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirming Judgment and Sentence and following denial of 11.071 writ application:

March 18, 2009

Date S.ehtehc.e Formally Pronounced following denial of federal habeas corpus relief:

June 4, 2 015

DATE OF EXECUTION: July 16, 2015 as provided by law

Punishment: Date Set for Execution: Death by lethal injection July 16, 2015 as provided as provided by law by law

CERTIFIED TO BE ATP.UE AND CORRECT COPY FILED IN THE SMITH COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE CAUSE NUMBER 114-81505-06 PAGE

Place of Execution: As provided by law in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division (formerly Texas Department of Corrections, State Penitentiary)

JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE UPON FORMAL SENTENCING WARRANT OF EXECUTION

The Defendant having been indicted in the above entitled and numbe.re.d cause for the felony offense of CAPITAL-MURDER as charged in the indictment, a capital felony, and this cause being c.alle.d for jury selection on JULY 27, 2006, the State appeared by her Criminal District Attorney MATT BINGHAM and Assistant District Attorneys APRIL-SIKES. and the Defendant CLIFTON WILLIAMS. appeared in person and by his counsel MELVIN THOMPSON AND. LAJUANDA- LACY. also being present and both parties announced ready and jury selection commenced, and the Defendant in open court was duly arraigned and pleaded Not Guilty to the charge of Capital Murder as contained in the indictment herein, a jury, to-wit: JAMIE LEACH and eleven others, were duiy selected, along with one alternate juror, and upon completion of jury selection the jury was impaneled and sworn. On SEPTEMBER 19, 2006 the Court proceeded with the trial with the reading of the indictment, the defendant entering his plea of "Not Guilty," opening statements, and introduction of evidence. The jury, who having heard the evidence submitted, and having been duly charged by the court, and after hearing argument of counsel, retired in the charge of the proper office to consider their verdict, and afterward were brought into open Court, by the proper officer, the Defendant and his counsel being present, and in due form of law returned into open Court the following unanimous verdict, which was received by the Court, and is here and how entered upon the minutes of the Court, to wit:

WE, THE JURY, unanimously find, beyond a reasonable doubt, the Defendant, CLIFTON WILLIAMS, GUILTY of the offense of Capital Murder, as charged in the indictment.

/s/ JAMIE LEACH FOREMAN CERTIFIED TO BEATRUE AND CORRECTCOPY FILED INTHE SMITH COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE CAUSE NUMBER 114-81505-06 PAGE 4

The Defendant having been found guilty of Capital Murder by the verdict of the jury and thereupon further evidence being heard by the jury on the special issues pertaining to punishment, the Court again charged the jury as provided by law on the following special issues:

SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 1

Is there a probability that the defendant, CLIFTON WILLIAMS, would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society?

SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 2

Taking into consideration all of the evidence, including the circumstances of the offense, the defendant's character and background, and the personal moral culpability of the defendant, is there sufficient mitigating circumstance or circumstances to warrant that a sentence of life imprisonment rather than a death sentence be imposed?

SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 3

Is the defendant, CLIFTON WILLIAMS, a person with mental retardation?

SPECIAL ISSUE NO. 4

Taking into consideration all of the evidence, including the circumstances of the offense, the defendant's character and background, the mental impairment of the defendant that might not amount to mental retardation, if any, and the personal moral culpability of the defendant, is there sufficient mitigating circumstance or circumstances to warrant that a sentence of life imprisonment rather than a death sentence be imposed?

The jury, after hearing arguments of counsel, retired in charge of the proper officer to consider their verdict and afterwards were brought into open Court by the proper officer; the Defendant and his counsel being present and in due form of law returned into open Court the following verdict, which was received

CERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY FILED IN THE SMITH COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE CAUSE NUMBER 114-81505-06 PAGE

by the court and is here and how entered upon the minutes of the Court, to-wit:

ANSWER TO SPECIAL ISSUE NUMBER 1:

We, the jury unanimously find and determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the answer to this Spe.cial Issue No. 1 is "YES."

/s/ JAMIE LEACH FOREMAN

ANSWER TO SPECIAL ISSUE NUMBER 2:

We, the jury unanimously find and determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the answer to this Spe.cial Issue No. 2 is "YES." /s/ JAMIE LEACH FOREMAN

ANSWER TO SPECIAL ISSUE NUMBER 3:

We, the jury, unanimously hereby find and determine that the answer to this Special Issue No. 3 is "NO."

ANSWER TO SPECIAL ISSUE NUMBER 4:

We, the jury unanimously find and determine that the answer to this Special Issue NO.4 is "NO."

As/ JAMIE LEACH FOREMAN

CERTIFIEDTO BE A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY FILED IN THE SMITH COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK'S OFFICE CAUSE NUMBER 114-81505-06 PAGE

JURY CERTIFICATE

WE, THE JURY, RETURN IN OPEN COURT THE ABOVE ANSWER OR ANSWERS AS OUR ANSWER OR ANSWERS TO THE SPECIAL ISSUE OR SPECIAL ISSUES SUBMITTED TO US., AND THE SAME IS OUR VERDICT IN THIS CASE.

IT was therefore considered and adjudged by the Court, that the said Defendant is guilty of the offense of Capital Murder* as charged in the indictment, a Capital Felony; and that the said Defendant committed said offense on or about the 9TH day of JULY, 2005, as found by the jury>

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Williams, Clifton, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-clifton-texapp-2015.