Opinion
NO. WR-82,314-02 NO. WR-82,314-03
07-22-2020
EX PARTE JOHN EDWARD HALL, Applicant
ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NOS. W08-63139-W(B) AND (C) IN THE 363RD DISTRICT COURT FROM DALLAS COUNTY
Per curiam. ORDER
Applicant was convicted of murder and sentenced to seventy years' imprisonment. The Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Hall v. State, No. 05-09-01368-CR (Tex. App. — Dallas April 11, 2011) (not designated for publication). Applicant has filed three applications for writs of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded them to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.
The appellate mandate in Applicant's case originally issued on June 23, 2011. On September 9, 2014, Applicant filed his first application for writ of habeas corpus in the district court. This Court received that application, in which Applicant sought an out-of-time petition for discretionary review, on October 20, 2014. On February 3, 2016, this Court granted relief pursuant to the -01 application in the form of an out-of-time petition for discretionary review. Applicant filed a petition for discretionary review, which was refused by this Court on April 2, 2015.
On March 30, 2015, Applicant filed his -02 habeas application in the district court. This Court received the -02 application on May 11, 2015, and denied the application without written order on June 24, 2015.
On December 8, 2015, Applicant filed his -03 habeas application in the district court. This Court received the -03 application on January 19, 2016, and dismissed it as a subsequent application barred by Article 11.07, Section 4 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure on February 3, 2016.
It has recently been brought to this Court's attention that the denial of Applicant's -02 application on the merits was erroneous. At the time the application was filed in the district court, Applicant's out-of-time petition for discretionary review was still pending, and his conviction was not "final" for purposes of Article 11.07. See Ex parte Webb, 270 S.W.3d 108, 111 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Therefore, the denial of Applicant's habeas application number WR-82,314-02 is hereby withdrawn, and that application is dismissed. See Ex parte Johnson, 12 S.W.3d 472 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).
In addition, because Applicant's -02 application should not have been denied on its merits, his -03 application should not have been dismissed as a subsequent application. However, further review of the -03 application reveals that it was not properly verified, and fails to comply with Rule 73.1(g) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The dismissal of Applicant's habeas application number WR-82,314-03 as a subsequent application barred by Article 11.07, Section 4 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure is hereby withdrawn, and that application is dismissed as non-compliant pursuant to Rule 73.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Filed: July 22, 2020
Do not publish