Green, Johnny Jr.

_ C()_t}~.t _~~ ~r_imim1l App~~~s _of_ I~~ca~----- . ··------b-~-~5'7tf-=-~- . - --RE-CEIVEDit\f .... -·· · -. - P.O. Box 12308, Capital Station COURT OF CRIMINft.L APPEALS Austin, Texas 78711 JWG 03 2015 Abel Acosta, Clerk

RE: Tr. ·ct. No. C-372-010189-1199474A; WR-62, 574-04; No. 08-15-00192-CR

Dear Clerk, Wherefore premise being considered Pro-se Applicant hearby asks the clerk of said court to filed his writ of Mandamus to obtain record. Also to file the aboved styled and numerated causes and cases in the approiate manner. The App- licant also requests that notice of orders, instructions and any other notices concerning his writ of Mandamus be mailed to the address listed below. Ancl-::.ariy ·. other type of relief that applicant is entitled to be sent to the same address.

Respectfully Submitted,

~;n~~4 TDCJ-ID # 1738876 Mark W. Stiles Unit . ·3060 F. M. 3514 Beaumont, Tx. 77705 Applicant Pro-se

---,-----~----~------·-··---- ----~---------------·-·---···------------------·-···------------------ ----------------------·- -----·-

TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

§ JOHNNY GREEN JR. § WR-62, 574-04 § RELA1DR § No. 08-15-00192 § THE STATE OF TEXAS § Tr. No. 1199474-A §

RELA1DR'S PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS 1D OBTAIN RECORD To The Honorable Judges of Said Court: Comes now Johnny Green Jr. Relator, Pro-se. In the above numbered cause and respectfully requests this Honorable court grant his writ of Mandamus and issue an order: to the 372nd District Court of Texas to provide Volume 3 of the reporter's record pages 5 thru 14 and pages 88 thru 232. And will show in support thereof the following: I.

This relator filed an original Petition for Mandamus, which this court denied, citing Padilla v. McDaniel, 122 S.W. 3d. 805 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). Directing the relator to file his Mandamus in the Appellant Court due to jurisdiction. The Relator has alleged from the beginning of his appellate process through motions and notices to the trial court, that there exists Constitutional error in Volume three of the Reporter's record. Specifically, that two biased jurrors were present on the re- later's petite jury and the jury selection process itself was unconstitutional. See: Franklin v. Anderson, 434 F.3d. 412, (6th Cir. 2006); Martinez-Salazar v. United States, 528 U.S 304, 316, 120 S.CT. 774, 145 L.Ed.2d. 792 (2000). 11 The prensence of a biased juror on a defendant's jury violates his right to due process and requires immediate reversal. 11

(1) - -·-·--··------·---·------~--------------------------···------~------------------------------------------·---

The trial court sealed volume three of the Reporter's Record and has repeatedly denied the relator's motions, claiming the Relator is seeking the jurors personal information. The relator has always and only requested the Voir Dire Examination, Challenges, objections, and the trial court's comments and instructions contained in Volume three of the Reporter's record. Arid not the jtiror'''s personal information. This is a deliberate obstruction by the trial court that violates the relator's right to equal protection and due process under the 14th Amendment. See: Bracey v. Gramely, 520 U.S. 899, 117 S.Ct. 1793, 138 L.Ed.2d. 97 (1997). " A trial judge that deliberately denies a defendant eviden.~e essential to his defense, intentionally violates that defen- dant's substantial rights." The relator is entitled under the law and pursuant to the United States Constitution to the transcripts of the trial process which include the record of the pre~trial

and trial process. It has been long established by the Supreme Court of the United States, that transcripts are neccessary in the preparation of an adquate appeal, or post-conviction_ collateral review, where the right to counsel does not exist. See: Britt v. North Carolina, 404 U.S. 226, 227, 30 L.Ed.2d. 400 92 S.Ct. 431 (1971); Gardner v. California, 393 U.S. 367, 87 S.Ct. 580, 21 L.Ed.2d. 601 (1969). " A transcript is a source of factual information specific to the defendant's case and neccessary in the preparation of an appeal. In fact, this court recognizes the right to a trial transcript in proceedings where no right to counsel exists." II.

Pursuant to this Honorable Court's ruling, the relator filed a petition for Mandamus in the Eight Court of Appeals, El Paso, Texas, Which held dual jurisdiction, on

May 5, 2015. The appellate court did not issue an opinion until July 8, 2015. Forcing the relator to file his PDR wothout being able to cite the record pursuant to; Tex. R. App. Proc. 52.3 (g)(h), 68.4 (f). " The Petitioner must refer to the page of the record where the matter complained of is found." In the appellate court's opinion See: (Exhibit Appendix) the court gives it's

(2)

opinion that this Honorable Court of Criminal Appeals refused the relator's PDR on June 17, 2015. However, the Clerk· of the Court of Criminal Appeals has never noti_- fied the relator of such a decision. The Mark W. Stiles Unit's Legal Mail log will reflect the lack of such notification. As a result, the Eight Court of appeals opinions that the relator cannot show the Respondent interfered with that court's appellate jurisdiction.

CONCLUSION The relator again Petitions this Honorable Court for Mandamus since (1) This is the only Court with jurisdiction (2) The relator is unable to compel the Respondent to provide the transcript of the Voir dire proceedimgs, to which he is entitled. The relator asserts that no reviewing court has ever examined Volume three of the Reporter's record pages 88· thru 232 to determine the accuracy of the respondent's claim for sealing such a record. Nor has any court issued an order to re-dact any personal information of a juror in those portions the relator requests, if in fact that information exists. The relator only requests the transcripts that contain the Voir Dire Examination and subsequent challenges, objections and selection of the jury at his trial. The State has never shown that the relator did not need this transcript and as a result, this has caused the applicant substantial harm. See: White v. State, 823 S.W. 2d. 296, 300 (Tex. CRim. App. 1992). " Defendant was harmed in the absence of a showing by the State that the defendant did not need the transcription from an earlier proceeding."

(3) -------;-------------~---------·-------~---------------------------------- ---- -- ------------------·-- --------- -----------------·- ·--------------------------- --------- ------

FRAY-ER-FOR RELIEF ..

Wherefore, All premise having been considered the relator humbly prays that this Honorable Court grant him relief and issue an order to the trial court to provide the relator with the transcript from the Voir Dire proceedings. And if neccessary redact any personal information of a juror from that record.

Respectfully Submitted,

TDCJ-ID # 1738876 Mark W. Stiles Unit 3060 F.M. 3514 Beaumont, Tx. 77705

DECLARATION I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and coorect. Executed

on July ___ , 2015. Duly Sworn,

~~.-CJ-ID # 1738876 Mark W. Stiles Unit 3060 F.M. 3514 Beaumont, Tx. 77705 Pro-se

(4) ----·--------------------

APPENDIX

1. Motions & Notes refused by the trial court 2. Court of Criminal Appeals decision on relator's

original writ of Mandamus 3. Eight Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinion and

order from relator's writ of Mandamus

(5) ----------.------------~--.-------·------------------------~~l~~~~EN :.L!.0:'.V" LW______________________________________ -·

--------------------------- -~ ---------- ------------ -.aGtoG-tM--.0§\Y- ------- -_ - --- ----------- - --- &Ruml\...n-; \c~ 11t?05

1-blJoR~\e. ~Ll~E. -3cc\\ \lt~h ~'72.P!JO a'~l\LI C..\ c,U"--T qo \ \J. &lk~~&-. tolJ! fllll\(2_ ~Q..T lJoltTHTt.xnj 7~ lcllk

Re ~ 1Q.i A.l CAl.Cj( ~ lt9cP-l7 4 o , ~rtl\ l C1l..Qc"" oB · It ·(.>0-31 'l · et2. Rcquc~n. l6 \HA..T VLilumc ,) trr\Q\1\\ 112:AtJ.S(!Q.I{)T be L\whl~

--3=rJh·-!'c~JA~I-'-"/--~k~t~-B:-;.._--/-J/?---n-------------2_·__ It::L 7h _r;_~ _j__z~=ccli], __') T/2_~-c~_/_ ·' _____________ _ ----------\73 ____ -- · -- -· ----:----- ·-------- ---------,-:fs---- -------- -----t::. o-t-1R.:1~•-- -o-l- -------- --- . -- --- - -rn/ _<;. 77i ~~.~- ,)r·-71:- YA..:J .s 7/iR.e/JAI'i' t_~.:)J/.1-I/J -rex/l..:s

y0 iIL -/J //(___ e__ cj)l'-{{~ IJD,'d; ,JGhN'JJY GLc'C'j,jJ£ ~ JfiPlL/11-i··r ;;._l 77-li_' /Jh::·vE c.l J

- I[[;· 1/ AIC.;· A}/.1/V/J:·) __5Tj . ' J CEcr; ~ _ - t--~c -- . ;· C/-J , fJ:;o~ c··,e; 7;,, rk 1" I G ' f.Jpo - --5£ A 1-1cl J <: /.) £, ...- , --<---.c.. _

r c.

A LLOt>J/;;-,./6 7?~: M~: J~/ .2: ;/ 5-e J~, c .ft c_~-j /) c/ <k'£ e AL I c _1-j 1 / ; (_

/1U;b lJ:5:5A). r, /e.:; TF!t..5 Mollo,;J FcL 5etA I .11: -£e.MOl/6d tOIL R.t:::/-L__")C)JJ-5- or Oc ;c.;,~_SliC;-...1/A-16 ;;._/ \ ... hl£;/--.__1~/ecft C/-1 lA/ vbf'p ._fl,·LL A12..J~ //.07 HAbeA.:J CoR..PtJ-.) heA.£../r-16 A;tc:/ Rf?CYue:.)l- PaiL -ihAI No bJIL5ec./ i:x:__ N/lc/e_ Ab.llifi.LJ-/- huL--l klhlcj., 1;;..// (Dr-_l5J,/u-/e_ A v/ol A J, c;.../ ~:;.f -rRE. Co"/..5-f,/~,-, lroAJ A I -.fhl/L CJlc,__s._] -- c5e c-1 /o.Ai t:e OUul A-lt:_'AII .5-ec: A/t; 1 /r;: J:k,eft-e._ i,_370 r. 3r-1 i./07/ '-!?& · 79 6 z -\(. L.s v' £, ,/ ~ Zt)O 1/) {A b_Jc:) L~e. d~~5P11/2.i I/-/ul Lbe.LI -Ic· clec i£/e /)/ 12 - t!J!._c.,>_:J~ ·- -5e c -lt r::: ;..../ JJc/ t::_jr;),__;,.q / f.JK.o-/cc-1 /C);....!). /:{' tS)c! /P.He..A-1/ A APP!tcA,fl '-'> RIGdtc_s~,,./(7 UeA! be k'eMovcc/ f6R !fir RPA:OON-:, ' r· _,, <:.. C> _£} I ' '-JL.. L. /'--1 I L. u l~i /"\ I 1{./1/..1 . ;- .'- ].;,__ t•r...IJV .....') I'IA~..J V.lt...Kc.:L J? ,..._ _...-, c· " . I c· • f c n /7 / r\ ' I£' "' __} ' F' I / . I /J..:J.!Uc-._) lit.-~"- II\ ...-- L.7 r, L/A( I • I j /) - -r· / ..-- /.? VI rlt:.'/1 ,r7/t__ /C_

7-lt/ ··m:t '-.TIJ/2C£-.:'J C'culc/ d:Je --f};/.e· AA!c/ J/\.4~/I;LtiAI Af...fc/717/17 7?/c ::;1/o,~.tu../6 'J

a'oct__//lit:'AI-/:.5 /JAtcl volt..I/L,JC-.5 be IJ.!c.:.IL!ck.c/ /1-..J P/J..er -=~ ('! .-rr-te • l!..ecr:.'JJ2rl -{(_)/2. /he. · L....A llL5e .. HAheA~ Co,.-~;:::,..r__') heA,e,J"'I6 lA! /r//...5

0,_, 12 oR :S A !Le_ A /:,c IL:, fLed /NJ I'OtL /AN/ Que:s/;c"LJ /, ke ,' U £b -ihN kuc,<J 7rle Atic.vzNe-6, -lk ck~~-!dAA/Is, o-? AAI;/ c/' frJe 55e:, , A 1-1c/ ,,_;/,g,~,-7>/e.e 77/e '/ fl//./t -n c:_' ~ /.1n1 r AI/,},RCe rte"4- U A/:v Duce C/1-X- - JPe c' Gi u e:'Ji, /, e_ --nlCJ"' £,c c~/J l Alllad€~ rB,ttM:/ -rF!Ls m 1-5 T/y:,Jc_ o(' C.A~Se. ... Jc~Ak:::/ of C'A:SC A ud 7/'/e,-<: e:.CPE:/2/e .-.ICe CDJJCE£/\I;/J6 ~J APP/icF,_f7" r::> AI.Y? tt-!Qu,:s;/-,ve. of' lr!e del0J5e Mid fli20-5ecuf i.or-(5 Chfl/leMc<.e:::, of +'cr/c,__;-{,A I IJU'/ZoJ2.5 •

·ii:

Jle_ch£A -/;oAf _I Joh_NAJ-1 ~tLeLAt'-:Jit ·,, Jx;;__tG f'Re5e~ll_'-/ IAI(.i/l.t:..Cc:IZfi-l--cc_/ ~-".J Tt:=_XA_:> ·DePIJL7f]!,e.~.lf ol ·. [p, fvJJ tJA / (1._,~-f t c e 1 /t1 ALk \;i~ ~ 1 le-.5 t) 10 ~+-I /;.J ·----;:( w_; p___;__X:J/-J Co~_,,~-..rl·-/ / Te.;r A_s , c-/c..' c I11~e ;___; ;-..fcle./2'_ . Pe;JAlr-/ ol {Je!ZJUL'/ IRA/ /fle FO~te..Gr:_---:oj;.../6 J.S 7*£,./e__,AJ...td (>::.>RJ2ecf -fo fk ~-/ of N/ Ah/l/'-/. b(t'CLrlc'd OA..I-1-he. z,:tcl dAy or 1 Uh!2.tl/lt2 '-/ ZD/5 9

Abel Acosta, Clerk

JOHNNY GREEN JR. STILES UNIT- TDC #1738876 3060 FM 3514 BEAUMONT, TX 77705

'N38 77705 •I •111r 11''I •·•1' I•' •lltr' 'J I·I· lr' •1••lr'r' ••r. •lrr •r•r' •l''rl••

..

..· /

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

§ No. 08-15-00192-CR § IN RE: JOHNNY GREEN, JR., AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING § Relator. IN MANDAMUS §

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Johnny Green, has filed a petition for writ of mandamus against the Honorable Scott Wisch, Judge ofthe 372nd District Court of Tarrant County, Texas. Relator seeks an order compelling Respondent to unseal one volume of the reporter's record which contains the jurors' confidential information. We dismiss the mandamus petition for lack of jurisdiction.

To obtain mandamus relief, Relator must establish both that he has no adequate remedy at law to redress his alleged harm, and that what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act not involving a discretionary or judicial decision. State ex rei. Young v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Appeals at Texarkana, 236 S.W.3d 207, 210 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007). A court of appeals has jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against certain ju.dges within its geographic district. TEx.Gov'T CODE ANN.§ 22.221(b)(West 2004). A court of appeals also has authority to issue a writ of mandamus if it is necessary to enforce its jurisdiction. ld. § 22.221 (a). Thus, we may issue a writ of mandamus to a district judge outside of our cjistrict if he or she interferes with the court's jurisdiction. See id. at§ 22.221(a); In re Washington, 7 S.W.3d 181, 182 (Tex.App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding).

The underlying appeal, cause number 08-11-00317 -CR, was transferred from the Second Court of Appeals to the Eighth Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket equalization order issued by the Texas Supreme Court. We affirmed Relator's direct appeal from his murder conviction by opinion and judgment issued on November 22; 2013, and we issued our mandate on February 26,2014. See Johnny Green v. State, 08-11-00317-CR, 2013 WL 6175127 (Tex.App.--EI Paso Nov. 22, 2013, pet. ref' d). On January 28, 2015, the Court of Criminal Appeals granted habeas corpus relief and ordered that Reiator would be permitted to file an out-of-time petition for discretionary review. See Ex parte Johnny Green, No. WR-62,574-03 (Tex.Crim.App: Jan. 28, 2015). Relator filed his petition and the Court of Criminal Appeals refused it on June 17, 2015. Given that Relator's appeal is no longer pending before .us, Relator cannot show th~t Respondent has interfered with our appellate jurisdiction. Consequently, we do not have jurisdiction to grant the requested relief. The petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

July 8, 2015 ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ. (Do Not Publish)

-2-