- v ~ W,» wwf/~» A§,o</ March, 30, 2015 COURT CRIMINAE OF APPEALS, AUSTIN, TEXAS.’ writ NO-VA,669-03 Té.ct. No. 01-cr 1711-83-2 Writ No.74.669-04 Tr.Ct. No- Ol-Cr 1712-83-2 Dear Clerk, _ Please Find Enclosed`"Applicant ijection to State Answerrto Application for pos.conviction Writ of.habeas corpus Application, Please File`ahd bring to the Attention of.this honorable court. yours truly, DELEQN*#1I57976,

'JUAN ALBERTO ,\ .,1'.» .-..4 " ~-‘ " E%R\g§§® §§ _ “ Adc_iress;» t ' `:U‘.' q n @§'§§@MMM ., .».;:;f;;:t::z::::: :‘;:::.,.Hwy 98 wRiT Noeva,€€§#o$.ana' wRIT NO=74,669-04 JUAN ALBERTO DELEON IN THE DISTRICT couRT QF GALVESTON ~Vq'g' 'COUNTY,TEXAS 56Th JUDITIAL DISTRICT STATE OF TEXAS 4..'.,} Applicant's Objection to Anwer to Application for Post- Conviction Writ of Habeas corpus; To the honorable judge of said-court;v Comes now, JUAN AtBERTO‘bECEON Pro,se,Rebutt state response to Application in the above cause numberd. s 7 Applicant would\show the court that there is Necessity Reason for a fact-finding hearing as there is enough evidence in the Reoord to show a conflict_in the.testimony and factsc Applicant contends if this Court would consider the fact that Applicant is only_5"4" tall, and not 5"7WtQj5"8" tall the state use False"testimonyjas;wellsasefalse Evideneeiie:theibookingiofii; cf the police Deparment, v if Applicant contends that these issue in ground one never was Resolved by the court,;nor introduced as unsupported verdict; Applicant Contends that ther@@are many merits and violation of his Constitutional Rights- _ Applicant would show the following;(New Evidence)' v I.' In this case, the New facts shows that there was a conflict in the testimony and Evidence that was given to the jury, and state failed to correct the false testimony, v which was the Applicant was 5"4"tall and Not 5"7 or 5"8" tall.“»v Applicant contends that state knowingly Utilizes perjurious testimony To the jury. that Evidence affected the jury judgment. see, Vol. 3, pege, 85, lines l-25 and page 86-87, the Rules indicates that a new trial should be ordered if there is any reasonable lik lihood that false testimony could have affected judgment of the jury.

Violates the 14 Amendmenti page l Applicant contends that the prosecutor has a duty to correct perjurious testimony provided by state witness, Even if prosecutor has no actual knowledge of falsity of testimony, it is sufficient if Prosecutor should have known of perjury and falsify documents by/the police Department booking date base,and seeing the Applicant knowing that Applicant was 5"4" tall,nad not 5'7"or5"8"tall- Applicant contends that these issues”are New.factual Allegations that needs some attending, and to be corrected.

Another error in was ineffective assistance of counsel, trial counsel failed to Demonstrate to the jury the true Height of Ehe Applicant.

The trial counsel perfor mance failed below Norms. it would have made a different outcome if Applicant was measured in the present of the jury to prove Applicant height§ this should bring a Ouestion to the court, if counsel would ahve taken Applicant height and weight in front of the jury,would Applicant Have been convicted? would counsel have been effective as counsel.?

Applicant contends that the defense was prejudice, because counsel done nothing to prove that Aonlicant was 5"4" and Not the suspect Or 5"7"t05"8" tall Applicant ask this Honorable court to order an Affidavit from the counsel that Representen Apo]icant to Explain Why Nothing was done to prove that Applicant was not the suspect' and that Applicant was only 5"4" tall Applicant ask the court to order an affidavi' from the state in Regarding to the perjury testimony and false Document of the Rooking Deparment of Galveston, T.X. .and 'Whv the nerj"“y testimony was Not correct tha affected the judgment of the jurv,?

Aoo]icant object to the finding of fact and conclusionsof law Without evidentiary Hearing on Application forwrit of Habeas corpus; Applicant contends that court criminal Appeals is not bound by trial Court's findings and con dusion of law in state habeas courpus proceedings,but is obliged to determine if record developed supports Those findings, if Record will not support trial judge's conclusions, Court of criminal appeals may make contrary findings, but findings Should he considered if supported by_Record, Art.ll.O?, Applicant contends that the state Nor trial Court did Not support their claim by Record to determine that my claim had no merits- Applicant proved his Burden by the Records with factuall Evidence page 2 Allegations, see Exparte Russell, 73 G.W.2d644 (1986\, see,In exparte Adams, 707S.WJ2d 646 (1983) and Exparte young/479 S.W 2d 45(1972), In Exparte Adams, Accordingly, this court is obligated to determine if the Record developed suppor‘s'the trialjudge's finding, if the Rec©rd will not support the trial judge's conclusions,then this court 'May make contrary findingsr Applicant contends that a new trial must be granted Because of the following: l)Prosecutor failed to correct perjury testimony of the Booking Date base information of the police Deparment stating the Appli ant was 5"8"` tall v v ` _ 2) Counsel failed to prove a motive that Applicant was only 5"4"tall _Applicant contends that he was Entitted to the favorable Evidence toan Applicant upon request, which Violates due process Rights. when the evidence is material, irespective of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecution, see,Brady V. mary land 83 s.ctllQe (1963) Prayer; Appli ant prays tha this Honorable court Re onsider his petition and Order the issue to be Resolved and Correct with Affidavit or Evidentiary hearing, Applicant prays for Relief, page 3