Hooper, Troy Neal

M ALELAMM"""‘: l - - , ' MFLLZ¢:LG_O \ '/ ' ` _ … %/@Mlblmiam;@” f i‘@_’,@j\(&j W ’M€Z~i@¢>gf,g@ uaw i@z¢M/:;L way 5:?, JLL__~;LJ LZ;XZQ@S:QL)_ .\AM W w L`M/£:vv;/(;d…% /Q@! _QSQM\CYJE' ly ( \@W , __<37,130'5'01‘ - . REcEc\./W\Q/ WT, M_~ nw _* coum 0F cmWPE/M 722/5 5560625\ ‘ -' {2»7)27525(2225 755/2 ._.. 2 557 27 2/;5 5 2255 2557/257 /§/5 7177_'0/0/777 ' vi ' zzg// _ - - _ Zz/{AML{#/ 75 2676/55 man ZéZAIZj/Z$. 554/756 ¢¢LJ/Q~ ‘ 7777 255)51006250070/!/ 522 &)227!02 5225'5( QGOM~ » iAQ.Z{immM-Z/ /! 5 0252, 05720'5/! 55 544 . , . 2275-um 70 525 25 52 2202 222/552 2/ 525/ 222/22222 20 572/5526 222/5 752/55025~ '~ T¢/Q[Lé¢~{ lAl£i/Zzoz"' 552/737’52 IAAM 652 /0?(¢~».(2_,_._ °7?72275@62/ 2527 225 255 525 22 52222(2/ 577)225’ 72722225 545225554 <22172’ 7 2J72~76» 007 Z(A>_,-~ , 675;/;§ ~ %5{],/00/52 ~ 0507§77' 5425.25 752 505755/1 526“7 _ 7 _ 277 525 736 7§77(2 . ' 7 ~ » /0/7//207§ ' Writ No. 2\.)19~~71€77# 1200 Ex Parte: _In The 265th iTrOY N?al Hooper Judicial Court Dallas Co. Texas ....... &O?¢O’JCOO¢O> APPLICANTS RESPONSE TO'STATE ON WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS ..... y I History of Case ..... A jury found applicant(myself), guilty of the offemse of Delivery of a Controled Substance in aggregate amount of one(l)gram or morel including adulterants and dilutants ..... State used a previous conviction for the offence of Theft from person to enhance range of punishment, from which jury sentenced me to lSyrs. confinement in T.D.C.J. and $2,50©.0Q“fine.....Motion for new trial was made citing verdict being contrary to law and evidence(CR#lO€-107)and was not responded to ..... Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed conviction and sentence ..... I filed writ of Habeas Corpus and recieved States response on October 27th, 2015 ..... , II STATES RESPONSE , / . _ `l".,'»`_._.~. ‘ ' State attempts to make relevant, rulingsra$moupg.suf / ficiency of evidence, . . "/' éf;r \. . . . entrapment,issues reserved for direct appeai,andlgarfzsuyrmedia time requirements regarding enhancements.... Cc) \ I II APPLICANT" S RESPONSE ..... z Conviction_contrary to law and evidence in a ‘. ...~ " `.:.‘ .-‘ `/~ \ ' iv.§,tate".s response to grounds raised in this application, deliberatly sidesteps~` the evidence and relevant issues and argues points that are not related ...... State's response to grounds #1&2 ignores facts that convictions based on evidence which is contrary to law and evidence are unconstitutional, and are not autorized (App.PR.art.Zl.B(h))and are required to be reversed(Tx.R.App.Pr.art.44.2) ..... State argues that challenges to the sufficiency of evidence are not cognizable in post conviction Hebeas proceedings and cites: Ex Parte Grisby l37sw3d 673/674... My first response to this rest in fact that:(l)Motion for New Trial was dulyi filed in this case pursuant to Tx.R.App.Pr.art.Zl.3 citing verdict being contrary to law and evidence(CR#lOG¥lO7) ..... This was denied by-non-response(Tx.R.App.Pr.- art.21.8(c))and was brought to the attention of the court in appellate brief(pg.m. l&2)prepared by appointed counsel Julie Woods ...... Though no issue was argued by counsel regarding this matter, this matter involves plain error appearant from the‘qpeUaUe record ..... The Rules of Appellate Procedure makes appearant the Court of Appeals obligation to review the record on appeal for defects or errors which would render conviction or sentence uhcohstitutionale and expressly holds that:" ..... if the appellate record in a criminal case reveals constitutional error, which is subject to harmless error review,jThe Court of Appeals must reverse judgement of conviction(Tx.R.App.Pr.art.44.2(a)).....(2)Grisby is not applicable in matters where findings of guilt are contrary to law and evidence ..... Ajudge ment or conviction which contrary to law and evidence cannot be supported by any legal basis or lawfully enforced to any degree ..... Discharge from such unlawful confinement can be sought at anytime by Hebeas relief..¢..(Preiser V. Rodriguez,- 411U.S.475,485) d Ex Parte Beck,9225w2d lSl,lBZ(quoting Heath V. St. 817 Sw2d 335,336 )Ex Parte Mclver,- 586$w2d 851,854)Tx.C.Cr.Pr-art.44.25) ...... Grounds #l§Z, should not be denied based on evidence or State response ...... (2) Evidence Illegaly Obtained State's response to ground #3 misrepresents issues raised and attempts to make it appear as if I have claimed evidence at issue was obtained by means of entrapment.. I have not at anytime made claims that evidence was obtained by means of entrapment, or that I was ever in contact with officers in this case ..... Ground #3 argues clearly that based on the testimony of both officers, the methods by which they claim to have obtained evidence at issues was in violation of law.. As it was evidenced in the trial record police admitted that they induced a person not engaged in crime to commit a criminal action in order to obtain the evidence at issue(RRV4p93,94,64) ..... My argument in ground #3 addresses fact that ,(l)~ police are prohibitted from inducing those not engaged in crime to commit crimminal acts to obtain evidence(Tx.P.C.art7;02(a)dTat§;V. St. 393 Sw2d 760 /765) ..... (2) law prohibits evidence which has been obtained in violation of law to be presented against the accused at trial(Tx.C.Cr.Pr.art.38.23) ..... Where conviction is based on evidence which was unlawfully presented, that Conviction is contrary to law... Ground #3 should not be denied based on evidence or States response.... Incomplete Reporters Record ..... States response to ground #4 ignores the fact that State law requires New-trial `where any part of Reporters record which is significant to appeal reslution is lost from record(Tx.R.App.art.34.6(£)).....Since there was objection regarding the chain of custody of the evidence at issue, which was over ruled in trial and was filed with the Court of Appeals in trial record(RRV4p9.lO,ll,)and there was ‘motion for new trial citing verdict being contrary to law and evidence, Court of Appeals had obligation to review that matter so to determine if that part of trial was carried out in accord with law(Tx.R.App.Pr.art.44.2(a)) ..... Illustated record of the chain of custody was therefore significant to appeal. resolution, and the Court of Appeals erred in not ordering new trial seeing that ('§) record.was without it ..... In light of these circumstances, and in accord with Tx.R.App.Pr.,at minium I am entitled to New Trial in the matter of ground #4.. Ground #4 should not be deined based on evidence or State's response ....... ENHANCEMENT State's response to ground #5 also misrepresents issue raised ...... State makes it appear as if I am claiming Theft from Person is not currently recognized as an offense ..... However ground #5 clearly raises the issues that Theft from Person is not currently recognized as a third degree felony.under current Penal code, and that-current en hancement code only affects penal laws in effect after its effective date (TX.P.C.art.lZ.Ol(b))...¢.Penal laws active after this effective date(September lst,1994) classify Theft from Person as a.State jail felony for enhancement purposes(Tx;P.C.art.3l.02,31.03sect.4(b)y ..... There is no enhancement provision under current code which provides for theft"from Person as a third degree felony.-... Ground # 5 should not be deined based on evidence or States response ......... Conclusion In accord with law I am within my right to seek relief in this application for writ of Habeas Corpus..... I respectfully request that this court consider this application based on the actual issues evidence and facts, rathe than merely on States response ..... Respectfully ‘\ #1897543 Michael Unit 2664FM2054 Tennessee Colony,Texas,75886 /0/ 31 /2@¢§' 649 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I certify that this response is in accord with the Tx.R.App.Pr.art.9.4(i)(l)(2)...... TROY N. HOOPER `( 59 . _ . fdsz wl t,)l';l"_'?rl'jj?:?(»¢¢) . ) , . 717 277 ij 779-4 , ' _ _ , - r> 4 TMQZ¢L_¢A/_/l/(r.’_ Ca/cZ/" ~ 577 7<!»/§_;77775_ <AA{L__( ,v/¢M./z, 7§2¢<§ d "!ZJ*‘/;' wm 74 §§[7’2§ G(Z;Aw!' ?77/077{7 77 {Mr?"“ WN,M 477&&/77/// 93 7@7 %/ 1747,47? 477<2 47“2’/%/¢(2/7/’2.4¢/ 747-f MAM¢QAFM WQ.LM¢ 472@/7?7/77/_ wirtz 7a ' ijan flaw 747/emsz 77 777 74 /4¢( _ %T/AMG/ 277`/ 7777.7 2,,/7777?72/~ 77 747 err’@4 __j»._@w_ ez§r:_ /'7’772 W 4744/7?_ /% /~/if / § 7,/¢(§§¢\/ 077/iff ~7/ 16[3’