Opinion
WR-48,152-09
09-18-2024
EX PARTE GARCIA GLEN WHITE, Applicant
Do Not Publish
ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND MOTION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION IN CAUSE NO. 723847-F IN THE 180TH DISTRICT COURT HARRIS COUNTY
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Before us is a subsequent application for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, Section 5. Also before us is a motion for stay of execution.
Unless otherwise specified, all mentions of "Articles" and "Chapters" in this opinion refer to the Articles and Chapters of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
Applicant Garcia Glen White was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in July 1996. On direct appeal, we affirmed the trial court's judgment of guilt and sentence of death. White v. State, No. AP-72,580 (Tex. Crim. App. Jun. 17, 1998) (not designated for publication).
In December 2000, White filed his initial postconviction habeas application under Article 11.071. We denied relief. Ex parte White, No. WR-48,152-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Feb. 22, 2001) (not designated for publication). In March 2002, White filed his first subsequent 11.071 application; we dismissed the application under Article 11.071, Section 5. Ex parte White, No. WR-48,152-02 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 24, 2002) (not designated for publication). In March 2009, White filed his second and third subsequent 11.071 applications; we dismissed both applications under Section 5. Ex parte White, Nos. WR-48,152-03, -04 (Tex. Crim. App. May 6, 2009) (not designated for publication). In January 2015, White filed his fourth subsequent 11.071 application. We filed and set the application to decide whether Article 11.073 "appl[ies] to newly discovered scientific evidence affecting only the punishment stage of trial." Ex parte White, No. WR-48,152-08 (Tex. Crim. App. Mar. 23, 2015). We ultimately handed down a published opinion holding that, if a habeas "applicant's proffered scientific evidence relates solely to punishment, his evidence cannot meet" Article 11.073. Ex parte White, 506 S.W.3d 39, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016). We therefore dismissed White's fourth subsequent 11.071 application under Section 5. Id.
On August 23, 2024, White filed in the convicting court the instant pleading, his fifth subsequent 11.071 application. In it, White raises four claims for habeas corpus relief. In claim one, White alleges that his execution would violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments because he is intellectually disabled. See Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002). In claim two, White argues that the federal district court's Memorandum and Order in the case of Gutierrez v. Saenz, 565 F.Supp. 892 (S.D. Tex. 2021), should cause this Court to reconsider its 2016 opinion in Ex parte White, 506 S.W.3d at 52. In claim three, White alleges that two unenacted bills from the Texas House of Representatives should cause this Court to reconsider Ex parte White, 506 S.W.3d at 52. In claim four, White alleges that this Court's opinion in Ex parte Andrus, 622 S.W.3d 892 (Tex. Crim. App. 2021), represents new law in contemplation of Article 11.071, Section 5(a)(1). In the same pleading, White also prays for this Court to stay his execution. In an abundance of caution, we shall treat this prayer as a freestanding motion for stay of execution.
Having reviewed White's application, we conclude that the application does not satisfy the requirements of Article 11.071, Section 5. Therefore, we dismiss the application as an abuse of the writ. See Art. 11.071, § 5(c). White's motion for stay of execution is denied. The Court shall not reconsider this Order on the Court's own motion or otherwise.
IT IS SO ORDERED.