Abel Acos'ta, Clerk M~ ~'1 OF ~0 F'Alltb ')0 "';,)a:t(' fu1P~~~ 0¥- \Jr~l"Mr~ SfbJ IV ~ -ea;N .MMIIP\1~0 '"to ~~ Ro~as. S~Rt~ TE~Tt; ~ ~.,­ 'TO PRD~~I£ c.4.t&: ~ AQlDN. ~\II~. ~Wl~ 5tWw~ n\f ~EftJJfY'VJ"r-~v.tT& ~-oB~R Wt~ ~r&r.l~ 8:F r~te:An&N ~· JJf&*T!.Va.. PRD~ UW'ti£ fZ-flR 1\JJ~ A-CrleJJ aN' i'lt£ PtJLlCC o-R ~ ~D FRl;MPn~b. A. 'V'MR~~ BlcoD ~AW f.)U-t ·1"0 Itt£ ~MJ.JT Rf!\J~ ~ C7R:. -~ <Sf'}::CJMI>tJ ~.

T&l~t: 1'\- '-cMPfTtNI I tNT£2ESreD DE~~ ~Nt'l . '.Nt'JU) W\'Vt:· f=)iEb ~N\OfltWt; 1""$ ~p~~ ·All*. F'J~ Df"PDRTUISL'\'i 1D 'E~J'() llt6' NGY.> ~ ~ ~ .AcnVN ~ \WJJ ~~ fLEAtltAI.-~ ~nn-\-f)l.)"r -E:\If)J r\A'\IlN"t \i \..eWE.b 'D!~Ct:Ne-R'{ OR ~t.AJ ~ th S CLLGhl\.

1l\-t5 C/t'Z£' A-s ts MM'i r MAJJ-'( ~~ 1 A .-e~~ Hsu=. c-~ at:: nt£ l.A{,k ()1:' E~~~(APPO\~t£D t.>~UAlL'l) CoUNbtL At.! t> D\S R:~~f) ~ ·ntt ~ fEt\f>Lc tiF RE:o.Ul~ PE:R~ o-F A Col.>tl'i:.£L l A:L.Lf&_tDtl'f 'FOR f)EF~\ JNt:ffEa}>~e ASSISf~ rs A ~EN -t N nttS I N~T'NJtE A~ VIOL~ OF ~ .ANtJJ~ ~ftvnGAlAt. PR~Een[:Mj S HA.s ~~ PRov&J , . :[WilL PRt:C:EEb WlTli A NtW 1\-f'FUCAll.lN\1 FfJR Wtk,·l1 OF 1-\~ tF-' l\1£tts~V .· I· D~l lSE"Lit-'1£ 1T WD\Jl.J) E?E J\.(3.{XE' tn= w ~. • G. •"' L. CbRifJ~ .)

Ru UNGt er<= \-t . . l'~ V.~ ..AN~~~~~ A~ W'R. \t OF -1-JA:]SEJ\<; ~S. 't'" ':ME N 1lt'- INitiA-L f\f=?tv·A:n- .• . ..., ' '«-W ~ :t Wtu.-o ~O*tlL'i AfPRECiA-Tt:- r\fLf> or- '1\J.N SOR-\ 1\~ ID IL:>.., .r ~ Be£N ~ 11(/\/V w 'PRo~ lf.lf:. lt> ltfESE AC.ll&/JS gy IH& PvLi .

TH£: 1"1M£. :t WA-S. 'QTOP~ffi gy Iff£ 7(<f"1A.I'Y~ ~ii.· ct Al'ID ~l"A-n; ~ ~ CJF \) ~ (..oN5f . ... .,, c:r'- l."vrl li WI\~ VJOLA1z~ .l.l · · · 'T\T\1~, ""'D lbNl>Rli.D '*AA1 'l'Ht;;,J ·. ~R.c1r€C"Ifat.J-5 tj1= ).#( ~~L£Gm I t)£F"-EN£E. Co\..MJ~' OIJ I BY ALL p~~ IN~~ P.s. r: wAs NOT -~TDff\Eb ~'( m~ ~R. rt>R · 1W';- 8>SPieto.N 01= A J)Rh)lf,l~ V'IOI..AiJVIJ i>KtJr.l€ Cf1M ~-OSPJet&\) 01=- j~IC4Jt:~ M1\Jt.l.b- ~~,N~ \tJ ND P~w~ ~-NG ~! S-'\W N ... l>i.Jll~f. . rvvq o' ~o ~ssoJcn ..JWtl!k5;, fE.ifFVll 'I' ~ 4-bDE-AJbA Ab~~A ~ ?__

. lh..e_ W- ~ -1-e-ct\- m5wl;k p~ J-o VVL0 ~V /'JLr' ~ ~ IYfl{ Ot ).e--lk, h.ec..J w .,+itt e.. ~ 6L..trb 11 s -i--e-c-h~ Ov\.~l -~ we;.,S ( Z t i J_ b~l teJJ>e '~ fd-ttnt ~~ ~ kty -\-o -~Lt 'f>{,e_~ of- (j U ~ lty, .-r {vld N\r, ~~ ~ w~ VU> w-ay 1t ~ ~ Ot.-~~C'V~ vvt..eacS,~, 't-Wl_?O~~;b~~ l ~ ~~ VV!Jy ~, t9v[ ct.tl T tuU e;~ I a W1 vwf- I'{ 1~. I fe-lt I~~ OL ~~ss, TLo W1V1 'S ~-twn l'lfft ~"'-€_ of 0 l + b W Ut -t\-w_ t~d< ef- (1'\~ ;~~~ d.e__~SQ__ ~ WlMieH- ~ ~ tow+' rvt'f 'I~.~~~-~,, WuAse.J a.vtJ ot lS ~ ttrol !' C~Vl<D{d..vJ,~o,( ~~_s tfrT dw... f'DCP-SS • ilt.£. ~ vYL '' rOt LI rtttdeJ '' ~~ -f-o wtA. M , ! -lot& ~~ l wOJAie1 l1:u- ~vJ to hrMte.. Y~Vt ~ ,'v\,~{~ ~ w·tx£ 'sh.ocl~/ wh.rvvt 6~n ~ :t nfllA) ~l,~ W£A.~ ~ fit-ttlJvl J a ~l~ blc-eA {es'\- fes-v\_t+~-tk.oci- wevs ~t QNJW'l A. ~ ~+ ~~w~ 1o- l~tN'ov+ocy f'r,,_~ ~ CA P'~ 4 f4>U" _w~ enA~ ·CA. p~ 6 ~ ~~II f M>.f 0\~ re__f«seJ iv obJ'kf-1 o-r«~~+- --tv 'hufpress a\'l'f of -+4ls, . · ~ lfe1\( f;r1>t n+* of. ll.¥l 1~.e1:,.Jcd o~ Vvtlwlel ~ ~- owt. cvM DY1 <PhL~/~ ~~ CAU_SE NO. 14722-A HB STATE OF T&XAS IN THE 29TH JUDICIAL ·.·:.".

vs. DISTRICT COURT OF JAMBS AUDIE SEXTON PALO PINTO COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT'S F_IRST MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL FOR BABEASCORPOS, UNDER TEXAS FAIR DEFENSE ACT, . ARTICLE 1.051 V.A.C.C.P.

TO THE HONORABLE .COUR-T AND JUDGE THEREOF:

COMBS NOW 1 Jamie&~ Audie Sexton, Defendant in . the aboVHntitled and n~red cause 1 proceeding pro se and pursuant to· ffii ··erexu-·· Falr~oefiiiie·-·- ·· ·p··· .---- Act·, codified at Article:.l.OSl, Teli:as Code of criminal Procedure, and Section 24.016, 'l'e~ GoVemment Code, and uk& the District Court to appoint him counsel for the •· specific purpose of raising his aubstanti_al claim of ineffect- ive assistance of trial counsel in an application for writ of habeas corpus -relief pursuant to Article 11.07, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.. In support of thia Motion to t~ ~. J)tfendant woulcl show the following: ·• ·

I.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Pursuant to a plea bargain agreement, Defendant vas convicted and sentenc- ed to 12 years cr:mfinement in the Texaa Depertment of criminal Justice. Direct appeal was vaived as pet' ·the tersu of the plea agreement. Thereafter 1 proceeo:. ing pro - ~ to hie atatus aa an indigent prisoner, Defendant sought post- conviction ~-revi~ "of the j~_~nt of __ ~!ict~()ll__ ~-- ~~t-~c:e. chall~:- .... ~-- .. ··--•" .... ing that his plea of guilty vas entered based on trial counsel's ineffective aeaiatanee and vas thus involuntary or otherWise invalid. To the Defendant' e ~ledge, the District court did not designate any iaeuea of fact to be resolved, did not order an evidentiary hearing be COI'Jducted and did not enter any fin<Ungs of t•ct 01: ~nd&tion pertaini119 to ditJpOBition of the appli- cation. Defendant received notice of the District ODurt•a order for· the clerk tC? ·forward the application and record to the COUrt of Criminal Appeele, and thereafter received notice from ·the Court of criad.nal Appeals of its receipt and filing • of the applicati~ (Bx parte Sexton, ~1. No. wa-79,966-06). on February 12, 2014 the court of Criminal Appeals denied the apPlication without witten order• < •

II.

AU'fBORI'l'Y !be honOrable Diat.l"ict COUrt ia authorized by Article l.OSl(d)(l), COcJe of Criainal Pr:ocedun, to appoint· an attorney to npnaent the Defendant · in this aatter. if be · ia 1.ndi4J8Rt and the Court concludu the interests of jwstice require Rpreaer&tation. TBX. 0001 CRIM. PROC. ANS.,_ art. l.OSl(d)(3) (Vernon. 2014). see BeaftJ v. State, 243 s.w.ld 783, 786 ·& n.3 (Tex.App. - Awu:1llo 200'1) • Section 24.016, ·Government Ooc1e,- also authorizes ·-the 'lii&tricfoourt "to appeint aounsel -to represent an indigent civil litigant in exceptional cases in *ieb the publ-ic arid private interests at stake are such that the adlaini- stration of justice aay be best served by the appointment. ~~ OOV''l' OODE ANN., sec. 24.016 (Vernon 2014). See 'lravelel''a Indem. eo. v. Mayfield, 923 s.w.2d 590, 593 (.X. l996)s Spigener v. wall.ia, 80 s.w.ld 174, · 183 (Tu.App. - NDc:o 2002h see also _Tolbert v. ·Gibson, 67 s.w.aa 368, 372 (Tex.App. - waco 2001) CiBCU"Ceration of indigent litigant •pr-imary uceptional factor• var- rantiag appointment of counHl due to fact that· incarceration creates signifi- cant limitation upan litigant's ability to conduct adGquate investigation and obtain evideace eupporting his claill) J and see. ax parte lUeck, 144 s.w.3d 510, 515-16 ('!u.Crim.App. 2004) (hebeae corpus proceedings, including thoae seeking fraa _confiaemant in criminal justice ayatem, relief generally~ aidered to be of a civil nature).

Recent deciaioae by the. United sta~ ~- ~~ !~i~te that the interests of justice warront the appointment of couneel in this case by. the District COUrt for the purpoee of repnsenting the Defendant in meaningfully seeking collateral . r:eviev and adjudication m the mrit.s of hi& .substantial claim of ineffective asaiatance of trial counsel.

In Martinez v. !yan, 566 u.s. 1 (2012), the SUpreD~B Court held that a procedur&l bar" by ~fault would not pcevent a federal .court fEGm hearing ' a substantial Claim of in&ffec:tive uaietanee of trial counsel if, in the State's initial-review collateral Proceeding, there vas no ~ or. counsel in that proceeding vas ineffective. !he Court uplained that, because initial- review in a collateral proceading. of a pri~'s ineffective aaaiatance

of trial counsel claim . is in many vaya the equivalent of his direct appeal · u to that claim, if · the State dou not appoint an attorney to assist the indigent pr:isoner in the initial-review collateral proceeding, he is denied fair proceea. and the opportunity to CIOlllply vith the State's procedures and obtain an adjudication on the merits of hia claim, similar to inatances in which no attorney ia .appointed to pursue the direct appeal or in which tbe attorney appointed to puraue the direct appeal is ineffective.

Subsequent Martinez dllciaion, the SUpreme COUrt decided a Texas to the cue similar to that of Martinez with the same raeulta. See Trevino v .. Thaler, .

569 u.s. 1911 (2013). In Trevino~ the SUpreme COUrt c:oncluded that where, as . in 'l'uos, the state procedural framawodt, by reason of ita design. and operation, makea it highly unlikely in a typical case that a defendant will have a meaningful opportunity to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of trial couilsel Cl'l direct appeal, the Couc't 'e holding in· Martinez applies.

See also Ibarra v. Stephen!, 723 F.lcS 599 (5th Cir. 2013).

Additionally, in the Martines and Trevino, the United Statee wake of Department of JUstice baa adopted a policy c:benge diecontinuing the practica of enforcing any vai ver of a defendant •a dght to seek appellate review of. a aubatantial claim of ineffective aseistance of counsel when the defendant has entered . a plea of guilty, including those c:asea in which the guilty plea !a entered in u~e for a puniehamt reccJillmllndation by the proaecutor.

Such policy change is in accord with the function of Martinez _and 'fntvino to ermure tbet judgements curtailing tbe rights and libe~ty of defenckulta c:haJ:9ed vith coa&ittiRJt·ccimaa ·have-been enter:ed in. accord· with tboee perSGilS' fundamentally important rights to effective npresentation of couilael and due prcceas.

III.

SUBSTANTIAL CLAIM OF INEPFECTIVB ASSISTANCS OF TRIAL .

COUNSSL EXTANT IN . THIS CASB A substantial claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel exists in this <:aset in th&t Defendant's decision to plead guilty r&ther than go to trial was made under durese .stemming from the following errore/omissions by trial couneel:

' '

• neither obtained dicovery packet nor interviewed Defendant until day Defendant WtS acheduled to appear in court post-arraignment (approximately mcmtha had elapsed alnce trial ~1 uaumed reaponsibility for the defense); · • failed to mount pretrial cballenge to arresting officer •s probable cause providing buia for .Defendant. 8 arrest •an(l subsequent. blood-dr~v ... police video -showed the Defendant appearing quite aober and in conb:'Ol of hill faculties, and shoved that arresting officer coupi~y took Defendant off-camera to conduct field sobriety teat which allegedly provi&a<J prob- able cause:. • failed to challenge or verify, thi'OUgh independent testing authorized by statute, accuracy and validity of blooct-alcObol test . naults allegedly showing. Defendant having had legally impermissible blood-alc:chol level, given pt"eaenee of police video sboving · Defendant appearing sober and · well in cOntrol of hi,s faculties and. given fact that documi:nt purportedly aaserting the Dafendant •a blocd-alcohol COI'lCentration level. at time of arrest to be .21 vaa not an official lab-9enerated analysis report., but rather, merely a one-sentence letter oampaaea on a letterhead; .

• failure to mount a pretrial Fourth Amenament challenge to the warrantlesa seizure of thE~ Defend&nt • s bleed speci.IMn in absence of his expreu c:on- Hntf . . ·.

• advising Defendant that challenge to probable c:ause or evi&mce against him could only be Ulllde at trial thus requiring Defendant to go to trial in .order to make any challenge to the evidence and an:est: • complete . failure to discuss with Defendant any type of trial strategy opposing the prosecution •e case other than advising Defendant that he had tvo alternatives: •accept a plea bargain or go to trial.,: and • upon the DefendaJlt. , informing trial ~1 during in-court appearance · that he wanted to go to trial rather than accept (!COffered plee bargain, trial c::ounael advised Defendcmt that if he did not acce,pt pltia bargair,a - offer bolt. . instead electe4 to 90 to trial, he VQ\Jld be facing mini1111.111 punishlrlfHlt range of 2S years confinement if convicted.

IV. · DEFENDANT NOT PROVIDED MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE SUnSTANTIAL CLAIM .OF INE~FBCTIVE ASSISTANCE CV COUNSEL Defendant's d!all11m9e to thii validity of nia Palo Pinto County conviction ·and sentence, in his initial postc:onvicti~ collateral proceeding challenging the ·instant conviction falls squarely within the SUpreme Court •a decisions in Martinez and Trevino. Defendant did not have any assistance f~ a licensed end 8Y.ill&d attorney to flush out· the fatcts at. an tavidentiary h€1ering or· to develop the habeas record with evidence found outaide the record before ..

the Court ordered the cl.erk to certify the record end forvaECJ it to the court of Criminal Appeals. The District. COUrt and Q)urt of Criminal· Appeals • per- functory hAndling an<i diepoaition denying the initial application evidences the Defendant~s pro. ae miaappr:ehenaion of substantive habeas COrpu& lav and failure to oaq;dy ·with state proc:edur:&l requisites in attmepting to seek meaningful . review · of the judgement - errors which &n uperienc:eCJ and skilled attorney vould not have made ..

v. DEFENDANT IS INDIGENT Defendant continues· . to be indigent and unable to retain the services of a licensed attom&Y. to represent him in pursuit of appellate review of his c:laim of .ineffective uaiatance of trial counsel (see attached Declaration of Inability to Pay O.ta and supporting Inmte Tnast. f'un4 printout).

VI • ABOSB OF WRIT ror the reasons aet forth in Martiliez end Trevino, supra, .the •etgnifie&nt unfaimesa" of the Court of Crialnal Appeals• denial of Defendant's claim of ineffective aaaiatance of trial counsel, raised in the initial-review collateral proceecUng .without tbe aid of a akilled attorney due to hia status as an indigent p:isoner, ahould not serve aa a reliably valid 11disposition on the marit& 0 GUCh tbat pneentment of that fundamentally iq»ttant claim in a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus vi tb the aid of appoint- ed counsel would be ··barred by section 4 of Articl.e 11.07, Code of Criminal Procedure.

VII.

GUIDANCE OF OUR FOREFATHERS Defendant respectfully expresaea his ~t desire for the District COUrt. to remain mindful that t.be peramount foCus in this partic:ular judicial matter •ie not the (Defendant's] innoc:enc:e or guilt, but solely whether [his) constitutional rights have been pnaened.• Accord Moon v. Dempsey, 261 u.s.

86, 87-88 see alae Irvin v. Dovd, 366 u.s. 717, 722 (1961) (habeas (1923h corpus relief available to J:edress due proc:esa violations •regardless of . . the heinousness of the crime ••• (and] the apparent guilt of thft offendec' 11 )~ Ex parte Milligan, 71 u.s. (4 Nall.) 2, 118-19 (1866) (•(I]t is the birthright of every American citizen vhen charged with a crime, to be tried and punished according to the law o 1'00 power of punishment is &lone through the means vbich the laws have provided for that purpose, &nd if they are ineffectual, there is an . inlmmity from punishment, no ftll!\tter how gnat an offender an individual may be, or how much his crimea may have ehcx:ked the sense of just- ice of the country, . or encl&ngend ita safety. By the protection of the law, human rights are sec:ure<i:. withdraw that protection, anCI they are at the merey of wicked r'Ul.era, or the clamors of an excited people ... ).

VIII.

CONCLUSION FOl' the reasons, . the District. Court ahoul4 appoint counsel foregoing for the specific purpose of investigating D&fendant•e claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, developing the record u necessary, and preparing that claim in a fom adequate to ensure meaningful appellate review of that claim on the merits.

PRAYBR WHEREI'ORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant respectfully prays the hon- orable District oour:t grant this Motion and order the relief requuted. De- fendant prays for general wlief.

J Audie sexton TDCJ No. 1787503 French M. Robertson Unit 12071 '" 3522 Abilene, Tuaa 79601 Defendant/Movant, pro ae

INMATE'S DECLAaATION I James Audie Sexton, YOCJ No. 1787503, being pt'ENHlntly incarcerated at the Jrnmch H. RObertson Unit of the Texu Department of Criiidnal Juatice- Correetional Institution& Division, loc::at~ in Jones County, Teua, hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing etatetnents of fact an tii:'Ue and correct.

BXBCUTED on this the ~y of Dec:ellbez; 2014.

CERTIFICATE OF SBRYICB This ie to certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing OOFBND- AN'r1 S FIRST K1l'ION FOR APPOIN'!'MmJ'l' OF COUNSEl. FOR HABEAS OORPVS has been duly served on the opposing party to this ease via u.s. Ma.il, firat-claas postage prepaid, addressed to:

CAUSE NO. 14722-A THE STATE OP TEXAS § IN THE 29TH JUDICIAL § ve. § DISTRICT COURT OF § JAMES AUDIE SEXTON § PALO PINTO COUNTY 1 TEXAS DECLARATION OF INABILITY TO PAY COSTS The following declaration is made pursuant to the Texas Rules of C1 vil PJrocedure and Title 6, Chapter 132 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code. Now respectfully CCIIile8 James Audie Sexton, TDCJ 01787503,: and declares that I am unable to pay the court coeta in this criminal action antJ nqueats leave of the Court to proceed in form pauperis in thie criminal action and ., _ would shoW the court the folloving: (l) I am presently inc:accerated at the French M. Robertson Unit of the Te~s Department of criminal Justice where I am not permitted to eam or handle IDOft&Y. (2) I have no source of income or spousal incame.

(3) I currently have $ . '%0~ted to me in the Imlate-_Trust fUnd.

(4) During my .. inc:&rc:eration in the 'l'uu. ~pal'~~ of criminal Justice I have reeeived approximately $ 3{)~ month as gifts from relatives and friends. · (5) I neither own nor have an interest in· any realty, etoc:k.th bonelll, or bank ac:eount, and I received no interest or divided income from any source. (6) I have ~ dependants. (7) I ~ve total debts of approximately $ .tlfJJ(} (8) I owe $ 4--- · aa restitution. (9) My monthly expenses are &pproxiiBIIltely $ c.:.:_?fJ.~ Being pnaently incarcerated in the French M. Robertson Unit of the Texas Department of criminal Justice, located in Jonea COUnty, TeUa, I ver!fy and declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing statements of fact are ~rue and ~r,~t.

Executed on this the

J~ Audie Sexton · TDCJ No. 1787503 . CAUSE NO. 14722 THE STATE Of TEXAS IN THE 29TH JUDICIAL va. DISTRICT COURT OF JAMES AUDIE SEXTON PALO Pl·N'l'O COUNT~ 1 'l'EXAS . REQUEST fOR JODICIAL NOTICE

TO THE HONORABLE COURT AND JUDGE THEREOF; CONES tiOW 1 . J~s Audie Sexton, Defendant in the above-styled and mnn- ber:ed cause ~' in eiJpport of his First Motion for Appoin~mant of Haboos Counsel, respectfully requests the honorable District Court to take Judicial Notice of all records on file vith the pertinent district clerks pertaining to the folloving criminal and ha!Jeaa ac\;ions:

a. CaUM No. 14722, State v. Sexton, Palo Pinto Texas: COunty~ b. Cause No. 147~2-A, J3x parte sexton, Palo Pinto County, 'l'e~B: c. cause No. 148131 State v. Sexton, Chambers OoWlty,_ Texas: d. cause No. 14813-11\, Ex parte Sexton, Chambers County, Texas; e. cause No. 13388, State v. Sexton, Chambers County, Teua; . f. eauooNo. 13388-A, nx parte Sexton, Chambe~ra county 1 Texa..~: 9• cause No. 13389, State v. Sexton, Chambers COunty, Texas: and h. cause No. 13389-A, Ex parte Sexton, Chambers County, Texas.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant respectfully prays the honorable District Court 9ranta hie request herein i:oa:· and <bits take Judicial liotice of all records of the abo"ve-r.sferonced eriminal ~nd habeael actions.

Defendant prays for general relief.

s Audie &:fxton DCJ l~. 1787503 F.H. Robertson Unit 1'2.071 FM 3522 i\bilene, TX 79601 Defendant/Movant, pro H PalO Pinto county District Clerk ~ P.O•.Box 189 Palo Pinto, Texas 76484-0340

· . .•. · P.le.&se find enclosed for filing in the above-styled and IIUIIIbeted cawie tile · fOllowing original doc:umente:

• DECr.ARA'l'ION OF INABILITY TO PAY COSTS: and

By copy of tbia l~&ttec, I am forwarding a ClqjJy of same to tbe opposing party at tbe C'lddmss listed below.

Please file and sutait the aboVe papers to tho District Court at your aooneat opportunity for heariag and dispoaition. ·."'{'; . :--: < ·".,

Sincently, ... .:::"'~,~--~ ...,.._,_.,,....,.._, .. -:·"·-·-~ ··.--.~--- .... ,..... -·-···- ·····-·. ···- ·-···----··-~··-- ···-

James Jwdie sexton TDCJ No. 1787503 . F.M. Robertson Unit 12071 PM 3522 · Abilene, Texas 7%01 Defendant/Movant, pro se JAS I file encl. cc:: £- 17... - ,:l../)1~

'·,

r tttY\ wr: +. ~ -to irt,tvi~ ab.i +~ s tzt-k"': . 4 VV''( ~CiYl t&r OlfPD•ttt~cJ of C.Cun ~e- ( {o-r +letb s CH~r:. . C Mo.~\4 ~ LA.w L\\-a~ lJ..-n- ·U>tf) I'VL ~+~~J {-rowt. .T\tlL befj·,~etlr.~ -tk h(aJ &;~ t.t~ lAfpc~ct.f me. ~ ut1ck L{~~ by ~vty wt.Mt ~Dl·~ ~urise-l Wtt~ ·t~qOtlfy o~-k'lv1l?c( w,~t ~ wA-«CUV\,+, 1k ~t 'ftA.\~~ ~ ik_ loi11- WA- ~ls, Cta\-vH~ ( tf ~ ot t\~~ts of-T~~ U.S, S~rtW\tti. ~r+ t,t,V\a· · ~l~ ft.-tis ex~~~ <:.-\~, : ·.· . ~ ~~ ,, Co~\J, ~fo.ie.., l-l>t4- T~~P· Laxis t-3'+'1~ s.~Ca( T~~~ (~-~~.W4-) z. ··~ \1\ \)~.1\~fC(.(, PO ,'30~·-('-f, :tot'f- ~UI\+1,~, L£.ilS 'f'qg z. ""'~~":·'fl \t' M~ ~y I f 3~ 5. Cr 1552 I' ~5 L &1: zJ ~~3) 'Pl.ta~ feb~ +.s:> VVly Mlf,,(l'Vt ace. ~ a~ ~....61We. a~ ! f>\~ -to t~MX-- a. ~w,f ~"f A~ou'YW.~ m~ ~\~~- '

R~ . t'}J(y,. '~ . 1- ; .,.~' . .

S~zz-t.O/) ..

Ckl • --.. '?<

Q;loP~t~~O founhf, D6\rJ 1 . • .

•. PI~~ r-e~t my N1oftC+1 fM Appo;vrt~f __ of Ceu\1\~J 4o p-re.~cw~ Wt·,·4 o{ +f~beas .

V-(~V\b -+o ~iw_ ~t.trt"fw C\ p~'o~ tul1w5,. .- . . ,,.

*1);?4T;d- -+N. rn~IO" Wet~ pos1ed +o 'fouri>,ff,ce. CwJ A-tfc~~~.~ of{t(,R.. +~rov5~ +~ l01w· L, bra '1 1-1 e<.e.O~">· I A.- 1(. 2. 0 ll/-. · Vour r:e.spo11~ 4-o my Cot re~~or'ld£.0c..e. uf_ 5 -IS~ .ZDIS"", o:;, to -f~ "2:;{-0if.y<>. +Lu.. of ·.. . /J\o\1'0V\- vJ.; S. meo VI ;V1_51€ 5:,$ CtVI of vi f> f'<Dp-u" o+ proce..du.ve.,.! . . . . RE>s~e_# tly , . f~k~ ' J"avVtt5 ~k~ .

T. D.c;. . :r:+f 17·&~~1~03· . -Ro~··+(~ u-r1~+ t?o71 t .M4 isS~Z­ . Ab~le.~..t~.,~ · · , ... ·... 7q~D/ · ·' St-t?~Mh~!j ~<;,LeJ7.1,6. ( §B tcJ) A;v,b /l'lt<:.~rt V. aJt•IPoL !VI- N -~·y 133 5.q: 1557...1 ~ L &f.. ZJttfrlift,l'ZiJY3] . . .

~~ ..J. ~-ie_ 2'ol<j- :te.4p, ~IS 'f5~8 CJ~ V. b-bJ.e.. zmq. ~ 4-Ff 1..0( ls (34'1 g \f\11~~ \11.~ lg"j'i?

Wl'-f ~ +P ~•S ~ v. ~~ Zo~-lf- T~4rf ~~.s 510<1 ~hJ \1. ~-k.J.e 'ZbllfJ~ Aft> ~ls f3GCfLf t:>e-uh V~~ ZotlfT~Vf ~tS (p1~-z_ +1-o\~ V- ~ un<-t ~~ Lfut.ts t.f1oul 8¥-~ V. &~~ 'LO~L.f TeN A-w ~t-~ lu371- AF . ~ CM"UL ~ ..-. -1

~ \ktcoh~ cwJ r~ ;~-Av~ b, , f1' wuviJ ~ ~ uV\~ '6~ ~~Cowt ~ ~~ IM'VI( rao~vht)W ~ W~ ~ ~·1Zlf,Dt7. (b){z,'tJ3) M CW\ '0f~UVL -fo --tk·~ ~~ ~-~~~ ~t~