. ~ , @ _ J\»~ai$zm»,-:» dwi le\£>.nzz?z@i\ gwing %;M¢n WM_{)M ~ /_:,\,Q§»\£ 166 mw w MAW\A U¥ Mamh$ Cso'mMTEXAS ' 5005-655 @\E§QM\§ET¢ Slxkz§ \>Q,;w¢se¢\ \;`\m;\»»§w€). G.Q \:Ar}r {:o\\\c\v§`\m\§ mg lamjl<ucl 5{5£?» \dm@ &EU~\MA w 3m QQD@{>@EA mw 0§ $MM&M\UW 0§ m AQO\AM 0§ gen ‘W£ §o\\ow`\m% 'A£S\>m\$€>£ bow CLENEHX\\/ ANA%OE<}\¥§¢/ Pc>`mXS ‘H\E %laiu€ m»aME§\ m\{\,;c\n L,_>`\l\ be weme hamm b§EJ.§§ \\\umbeve~\§/\B , ._ ~ " ‘ l 54$& u&,\=A u\s 63 Q\me\)am:. couRToF cR»M¥NEA?/|\|EPEALS , ` Aus 20 2015 - ,(\;rEMEM REE>OAMS£

. 6 ~ Abe!Acost , l- /5\'{. _g~MLE §§`1\5 la ¥EXAE `1\\&5<0 wm§,¥z§);€\a§imm\\r~.¥ _50¢\>11_ zAAmse\ Mm¥a¢§§\;.k@om\e m652 im APVHC?\M~\S \\ R‘E,S()BMSE, '\0 .R§S:~\c\&.u`\¥ SL_\.\Q rv\>.¥~\'€A Or\.) _N\am;\\ ‘?>O~.M>\B b\) -~H?i~al mu<_»'re\ ‘{\Eoomi (BQALMIAA 62'.’01\5\3\.'>05\)4 §§le w`\\\)w 4>\\£ C,mo} 21»/\)& ?fz.c>?o§§\y geaoEA @M~Dnz 3431£, §aiA azbr>ouse Po;u+$ 0\>¥. m CLE+z»l\aw<L c§nmma\m~€»_ &zom~\>¢\')z QLCX>M>\\ rha/m EMAAEQ>\>&K.`\ES zmA mma-kij N\'@x 5206$`\.~`\51\ \*m§ \\.90¥\' E`LQ\BR¢\J"<_\,\.M§GQ, L.)\\A¢\\ iper (:`>\'B§E may_`:’,é> MD m v);-¢$Qomsa =.H ¥U\\ ae`\neme§ DS~<W»E cok>%w+§oQAM-d& QES\>DMQ,E wou\¢\`b€' Q)EA:>MAQM~¥\ mci ¢\&\0£> Dr<>i>l.ir_am& KLES?EA:QL>\\\/ £L€ODOE,S-\ “\'\\$N)¢\z Couo§c 0)6?:&0.

A<O~W\'A§- domm£x\>~¥ sol 6 Y\J\\EQ\ ~'\'v£,v:\me¢\`\¥ 0§ 303 mdl\\)\¢\.\sal QDSM¥§ w\'ad£ be\o\.\> m QE&,<>DMQE\LD Q,OE¢A.Q;L PQOS>I>.$EA Y`\MARM@ c>§ Hx\- by ~\><\E S~U. . _ pUl>osE¢\ \YSHAM \~\~§ ' "5£5§ Flmlm€s S\w§_ um com~)€§&§i §?fl/wobrii l:imh HS)B “5\£_ algoma ¢\E£azwcid RESOOMSE by }\WL/\r_w¥ 40 5¢0»<31 Oo\)L:QE\S A££{¢lzwnL ?01)1146 ou-\ alma mmu§‘\e+'ewo\e§ Nb)c aw\‘amEA b\) wm mu§';\ 1402 ad'AQEsé£<L b¥ 502 S¥aii/M)$ §im&`me\ 412/kal cum§€\$ 6¥¥§621>`\4 J@ bc‘med;\gl£' `~\'<sai 7 Or&,m@m£ am[ims,¥ wards imvaooe@ md cowMSE\`m A c,&aiimem Ar.s‘-\m,@l, chem Y\LW\§E`\S 69 a cnmo\am& made wi+% ake S‘¥abe Emz C\)

`IMAJ`\<;A§B¢\, <L<> ¢\)¢\Ew\ 905 A'©Q\j\aamjc \/\S&LSb MDQL fog 3 NMAEP\@N®MA "_“E.\`?J‘O \/\}\§ mm A);¥emg€’; fhwa 09 \\§(\'E Qm>u<£g 69 cDMQEAe\¢,M ~w emma 465 ` §§ dm \f 5\1\1550\>23»\~416 \)s '\\@7_@, n\),1 )Jo@ '\_M 0€591>»¢§£ 4<> °\XNE QE,Q>oE§’r 61\> R§§-`\AU>`H m Q\)n£ `\mS¥@\>)c \-\§o€a,% QQ»>L£EASMA Ona!\€melh\~l€z R\X/u€ E§§'€_cki\\€c\\`x';§>§ §§ \\ig Qev&o;>\mmcf> . wom$€\ €>MES ESSE\\>;\%;§N ~`\5?¢»€ c\?€oes`\+€. `me%&\ womaw dm~\\'®\@§r MVU QM¥S GQEQGW mem mi\zueu¥am,§ \»l§ anwm maxwme wave mw mw\s~¥m‘v"ooc>¢>e,E-s we mow Sh§emzu”r wait \n£ kohw\>¥ma; manhqu a mmse‘\\m\¢ J&\eocz>o wm `EN~CI>P»Q~`\E“>\¢, due 40 .Sloo\i,@ul< ‘\M`X\znwcb\ow t>¥ cx>»_:\.$u£>{m@ Fax¥‘» n.`\mq 902 m\>€,£>~\»i Qx@b`\DM-. Mwm€,‘\§¢\&mc)f&$ 6\)€.\\ 65 ~\X\£S€ §Jcaaj\z\§ cazA;b'\\_>l. QENM\(:§S o§ w\\ic>¢§ SE+ §§ wawou€>&$ ig max AQQJQQL?,, » PQ>OGS&L\ Y:'\MX\M 30 ' /511¢ VJ;CMA Smu)\$na} \\ma§ amd COuME>E'\ SALE¢\ wis ()Qalmax W\D\Aor\\€> '§.\LC£P-\ 01\)€ ou \’\RE Q\BM 0$} \\&>'La§- J)<\\“>A ~\>m)§~ mo~\q` fm was Mo¢r `\(\E.U)o\, QE£\-¥aim\y a CDUMST;\ \m\>ES\'l€)ai`\Ma 6 maxim 404-65 m"\\\s_€» SOEM& ' \‘ax).A)E mmm>¢\>l, 6¥ lime ma Wec>aaahow zu\>¢\ b'\sc.<>u€;zaxo1 wk&\adieml¢ w‘m> '\me,'\§~\&iou %`\m”_> in W`m) §mmd¥\£b\.=.aml es~. wou\¢\ hang \(\m;l nran ank\,;w mikva \\»\\z,ama&~vrm~\>¢€é.l\hmzm\ mg PM‘OMM rv@£¢AQb\/\L¢\>% 0034>`\& GJ\/\X~. \/\_/ou$z,_ w\¢\£n£®<\£ crle oc_cu `M-:A~ wives ~&XE mmi :=!\\E¢;_\~*;A§m 'Aoz>¥\ Q\axs m£'>`m\£\~w£\ AA.\D); emma gm m`\&,\ 3§_;&4»£ -M\EAQEA aMc\A)?_NX\ u_>\\f:m_:, '~‘mu\] mil§'z\x~\$ €\WESZ€A¥\O‘DE ;u_>u¢l‘¥> myv\ah@mctz`am’\w§&w'€$§ Q;@§ z>§¢ w E_\\@Q% v\sm\A m \@m¢=_e_br=_ _ 19 we oz;;) AH&`EN$£I;:_ ‘C\?;\ii€q.m ag M AW`E bg Q'\\E%d 3de \ QQ/O()Nz&l hung 5 »3` §ML\.RM§S SHJ\_>AUNLDM‘E$ ‘1 wl§\)#\_il€§i?:?§r §LO"Q\'\)Z J'Mmérv\/PAL.H£ widib)&|l~<|@ O§ M),Z~a)) mou§_.p&\ 64 ‘Azw§-l/ has r),EA/QIQ. hew a:d¢lu€:§&\/, @NA hea& .H`/ fs ~D+ 60 Muc&\ wl_{/&+L\Eo/ mb wo+'»bz/ia) cou/\)§¥J wax wage di M_Mu@»u+g w@&~mm§" AS \MWQ Lz. aba ,~D+ dsa whom m \ AQPUM timmy iv uaw 09 \Ona)r M@%wezs'>'. ` , PQDPMCL cmi;w ‘2 A /" ` ‘ 13 MM'E,§&L\, wm Mm§m QQDM£ §§qu 5 @LM}' M@?M` - n/£,'LMN;HP%EQ‘WUM i>na/§¢:>L>QAM &¥\Lr»;i ' mu§€ adp 441/ml mm§&‘ié >Qf-£m\a~i+, ' "<Q‘mj mm§¥:, 591 mad£ ?maOm£»ZéJ¢./u‘\' ,' ’ 1.QMOQMW»QSUE\ cim¢@lz¢‘w we ma QSPD»_% »LD we §Hie 836 immqu gubm+-lz£@$ w ¥.\zl\hbj\le €)E:'; Hdb€as rams E»<)ni`n§¥ H'§ § z> ?IZDPG£&A F}\>A.XM€) \D l v `/5\)£§ {'Séui_ §i) umwm\*£§t&& b.\)¥?@g\)&$ \1\\.7; PDSM¥ \On@»\ iowa Cum%l 115 usx 60 Aéevb\>dz \uueg¥m£cu mlp .AQQU@AA; P%~`\\;\aaxzm;a%ou w~-z\a;\ \ngv»\a»ai“;¢ mw mm w exam ma %m@;ms\\z.mwz »\o‘=\kne €%SXE (Z>axz_. ' QQDQO§iA_' (;`\w=\i~€) il /{Ll§ m kimme QQ£UI¢SV§§Q\ 505 `\M an`£. cl£“\'a.l\ }ro §§Pc>l,\c;m&$ anuioos\y> ‘_\?`¢LEA Q£.S€>ov% 40 ~\o,`<~a,\ cowge'\§ H¥Ma.u`\£%mz ouEz, 40¢>5 umc§&£©q®»\) ¢\)}1\>9 c>~F §M`.ib MA,MLE%&&_R>M)S') 175 N04@\'MFS QBVD\)R(E:¢\» 309_ 00 A>E<\@\)Od . 69 609€30\5&) M §a£~\'ua§\) o ` § _ MA@_F.MMAWQ is m,;(m me wee,s»m.<,\-:,z] wm M<:) v V~~A€A.§MB zezu,s. ¢_ wm ..”WAJ\ MMQE)B 195 M:- §J@£.z 666 WM he@ue§hz»» EA 1909qu (Lah`o/\)a.l|:/ com-45qu Pai wmckain comepie@£y %Eoejzw. am a.c, edward m <=kM-,'Moo/ won§e mng SEL.F.A 59 ,¢zs>PL¢‘c,z,mL1 =H\z 'Ns\zstm 306 mon 05 Lv'\f> niemd i ll»u&§$ can ap'a>\iom,\\a `u\s&o amaxon m amy'giJi>:-m\>iou ibma)\_v am imh‘oml\_\/ emme& oues`\’m,\ mcneal eiH»'eez.

516 ’\N§,o@££}c}\BM-¥ `\ML\ES¥\€)&J\:§QM do \CNQL¢)~\)\~`,§$ 09_ lm':u> aJ\_,,L 616 um- ‘A'§.'\ mn_§i_ll\l'dx`j \ l ;QQDQD§’E£\, ¥`\uAL\LQF \()_ /{:6_\}.5 §§ 3 `\t\\\mc. 909 %mc_'"ml>m:ew)r'\\\£ §§G§.£BPQEM$~\© \OE mm,{m \\><\a)c wam.é€ B,P?Ucm\>-\S O,ESQDMS£€) cb\soi 9 ~\'O»`\a) zieva m\\\&\a}~®\@&£@z \\E, was com@e~¥€\\:\-W¢>k;\aha * fsia Bame. wom_ ax \bs¢x\"[‘\']he §Y.is ” “ ' - ‘ did _\S`MG‘\ alww§ ap `\O \UH:E. G;' EUEK) a §EUCTQ?;V$Y(.\/\B§O,LC, ' jo 519 uus¥w¥ca_gi wav@awmtz mzm`\w€¢ wmc>€§em,i\mw£w am 12605 40 ble ad&z»§%€é \0@§<>0,§ wax bmeéom ivAac:Bc&¢->MS ~l)@a} a@§\ 34 "\¢\A<> %\>€,;>dom `<>DSS‘\\>X/; B\@A¢,{ N@ 0®¢@93;~9}»1~\30 hawk ND)¢ am f§§\)% do 1930va 664 owes %G`omv\m@, <§Qv,e\\)€ ~1@‘<1»)\. \\ v gabszch my tug -\~3 M ¥UW\ §M<)<>D@\ 466 63 662 dm M@um¥ w m+ €6200‘\6£\ AQ?\§MLA'\¢\) §a§;k- Qv,®u"\& }»6`\:\15 QM`©Q>N ¥'\L%¢\ wong 40 wm mmsi';\s R‘§$»lc;\zw`\lrq w wow\£a&)£®§?\ai\\y®\)~\$ \)5.€ miami anew {méwéz ~N\/ec»a w'\~\?(\¥@ ` mm §§alz A;A wolf §nu@m@\\\§ 03\3`@\) AoLun/GQ§. \\oww'c<z,; 14 af@m guam \\X\z v,&;mn\ wl wm @DLNQ-:r§ wm §m.\»+ ¢w m mg MBES;SU\ +¢_> ZM»§OUJ\GKOL) ®33004 ap?\icav¢>§€> ‘E\L~\Em£,`\\)'€ mSM-\<a)\ \\EQ&»\)¢\ kidva Dmor_.>, do kl; injured mack :3@1\ %Cmd$ ~ wk;c§\ md wuw€\ dm,% mm mae way we gamdw dim MSMM@ ' £Q/Z\@DS’§CL $§MEL'NQ§H' 17 7 /iS/LU {S§TES hUE @mu!a§§\)&l@ EZHU ZLRH)?ZE..SS&:]/UM °p)\f: F%€/l:)l)§ ` ' %@M§ES §>‘,¢u¢\f m Q.OPL; @M: fa%))(`oué§ '§Lecl MSPON$ J@ Jm`s) Uw¢\:é€)é §Q'dzw{+, §EPFLL<L£€ JLE@N®M+ him mud be me£ \/\Om§am AWC‘¢M VPW§ ~l%@l 4qu ax)w¢ Ow§d)e/L»Q¥U rha$?orc§€ Hm'r§ ml}\)& ¥AI“E m }IU amd AMJ)€§B ‘l/Q\.E 'iwcoa>é'r§/lmuc(e§ JEM€)\)&¢M%E<£ `uu -RL'<M DO\:M%}§ COM-§’U£FW\N€\ §an\/E€!\>B §)ES`\€N&'FQ`N¢] %o%@§ is§w: .Mvz§ow;m>w 215 walk as amf (>qu% 1+ deems fam@pm-doz amslm $w/v\<>l)ne QEcDad. . %mm€~U/\ V\!@)ANE zwem£”z\r€wzn§ AM&M ' (`/W\>?in\/ `\/M‘l‘\’ am FM wl \CTW€MTO§ 7811‘1 -('_C §wwmz<l¢o adams wax 0§ w~l.ml llost .` 3m §l'\s%m& D~H@WN @§$M HM§ CDOMFM Td\ §\4) Kenneth W. Jerome v. The State of Texas In the 263"' Judicial District Court of \Harris County Texas Case: 1233728 Response to Affidavit Submitted on March 30, 2015 by: Trial Counsel Jerome Godinich Jr. To the Honorable Judge in said court1 Comes now the Petitioner Kenneth W. Jerome filing a rebuttal in response to the court ordered affidavit by attomey, Jerome Godinich Jr.. The Petitioner will show this honorable court the following the following: ~ ' I The State requested the trial court order designation issues that needed to be addressed. Further, the State requested that the court order the Petitioner’s counsel, Jerome Godinich Jr., to file an affidavit addressing the allegations of ineffective assistance ,of counsel on March 27, 2013.

II The State requested proposed order designating issues and for filing an affidavit to assist the court in resolving the issues. Trial counsel, Jerome Godinich Jr., was ordered to file an affidavit summarizing his actions as counsel for the Petitioner in the primary case 1233728 and give a response to seven (7) questions. Trial counsel was ordered to submit said affidavit with the _Post-Conviction Writ Division of the District Clerk’s Office within twenty days (20) of the order, signed by Judge J im Wallace 01°263rd District Court, April 3, 2013. Counsel did not respond ~with said affidavit until two (2) years later, but still showing ineffectiveness.

Rebuttal of Affidavit Petitioner will point out each issue in accordance with the seven (7) questions and trial counsel’s response,With supporting medical documents referred to ass Exhibz'ts MD - A thru 1 Point 1 - Mr. Godinich fails here to answer the State’s question. He is asked if he made any observation about applicant’s mental status generally, not his competency specifically (this is asked later: questions 4, 5, &7). Mr. Godinich’S observations should have included not only ..;». applicant’s behavior during their interviews, but also his review of applicant’s medical records, specifically his psychiatric history. Mr. Godinich’s response to The State Bar - see Exhibit H; (arising from a complaint filed by applicant) strongly suggests that he di_d» suspect mental illness / incompetence, as he was on the verge of requesting a mental evaluation, waiting only for applicant “to articulate a conspiracy theory.” Given applicant’s extensive psychiatric history (see enclosed medical records, namely Exhibits MD A thru I) M to the instant case as well as his treatment during pendency of the case, Mr. Godinich was not justified in waiting for something so extreme as a “conspiracy theory” to appear prior to competency / mental health evaluation.

l|Page Point 2 - Mr. Godinich is not a psychiatrist, and therefore is unqualified to answer this question (#2) by his own opinions. He ought to have referred to applicant’s psychiatric history as provided by applicant’s medical records, and consulted psychologist / psychiatrist / other subject matter experts, and used them rather than rely on his own opinion that the applicant was merely depressed in a way “that is not uncommon for anyone incarcerated and awaiting trial for murder”.

Mr. Godinich makes no indication that he consulted such experts or even reviewed applicants pre-arrest history of psychiatric problems, which is extensive (see Exhibits MD A thru l) . Mr. Godinich further says that applicant’s “questions were relevant and his factual recitations were clear and consistent”, implying that the applicant was “ able to assist in his own defense”. This clearly contradicts Mr. Godinich’s response to the aforementioned bar complaint (see Exhibit H), in which he states that applicant is “more of a hindrance than help to his own defense”.

Moreover, Mr. Godinich’s response indicates that the applicant introduced confusing facts later in the investigation, of such a type that he feared might lead to applicant “beginning to articulate a conspiracy theory involving law enforcement”. This certainly doesn’t reflect “clear and consistent factual recitations” as Mr. Godinich now alleges. Which assessment would he have us believe?

Point 3 - This response calls into question Mr. Godinich’s thoroughness in his review of applicant’s medical records (present and historical). Mr. Godinich indicates here that he reviewed applicant’s jail medical records, but makes no mention of any investigation of applicant’s prior psychiatric history - and it is extensive (see Exhibits MD A thru I) . It seems he made no such review.

Point 4 - Again, Mr. Godinich contradicts what he told The State Bar (see Exhibit H). On applicant’s medical record, his Axis GA_F (Global Assessment of Functioning) score is 50 (see Exhibit MD; B, E, F). This qualifies a person as psychiatrically disabled - unable to sustain employment, and qualifies one for various disability benefits including social security. This low level of examining ought to have called applicant’s ability to stand trial into question. If Mr. Godinich even noted this figure, he likely did not investigate its significance and ramifications - or if he did, he simply ignored acting on it.

Point 5 - Mr. Godinich gives no indication that the applicant’s mental condition improved by the date of trial, nor that the opinions he expressed in his response to The State Bar (see Exhibit H) about applicant being “more of a hindrance than a help” ever changed prior to trial.

Point 6 -_ Mr. Godinich, again, contradicts his prior comments. Moreover, he equates applicant’s ability to recite facts to a jury With emotional and psychological stability sufficient to Withstand the rigors of trial; they are not the same. Someone With the applicant’s extensive history of psychiatric illness, especially given his suicide attempts (see Exhibit MD - D) , cannot be considered competent and stable simply because he can “tell his side of the story”. The illnesses from which applicant suffers cause problems with reality testing (inability to distinguish reality from delusion), especially in emotionally charged situations. Had Mr. Godinich known and researched this, his only reasonable option would have been to pursue incompetence, as applicant’s ability to perceive and react appropriately to reality is called into question. See point seven (7).

Z|Pa.ge Point 7 - Mr. Godinich ought to have reviewed applicant’s full psychiatric history, consulted subject matter experts and applicant’s treating physicians, and pursued a hearing, without waiting for a “conspiracy theory” to surface. Sufficient doubt about applicant’s stability and competency exists.

See Exhibits MD- A thru I In closing, Mr. Godinich claims to “remember this case very well”. [f this is true, why did it take approximately two (2) years to respond to an order requiring him -to respond Within twenty (20) days? This further evidence of his neglect and / or lackadaisical attitude, at the root of his ineffectiveness.

3|Page