Austin Criminal Defense Lawyer : Austin Criminal Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Jamie Spencer Law Firm : DWI, DUI, Drug Possession : Serving Georgetown, Round Rock, San Marcos, Travis, Williamson, and Hays County, Texas

I didn’t give the prosecutor enough credit, when I pre-guessed that his response would be “out of time”. But he did throw a procedural wrinkle at me: Municipal Court judges can’t grant a writ. From Article 11.05, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure:

Art. 11.05. By Whom Writ May Be Granted.

The Court of Criminal Appeals, the District Courts, the County Courts, or any Judge of said Courts, have power to issue the writ of habeas corpus; and it is their duty, upon proper motion, to grant the writ under the rules prescribed by law.

Municipal court not listed, therefore a municipal court judge does not have the power or authority to issue the writ. Although 11.05 does not specifically say the list is exhaustive, it’s still a good procedural argument for the state.

A good argument, but for Texas Government Code Chapter 30, “Municipal Courts of Record”, Section 30.00006 “Judge”, stating in subsection (e):

(e) The municipal judge shall take judicial notice of state law and the ordinances and corporate limits of the municipality. The judge may grant writs of mandamus, attachment, and other writs necessary to the enforcement of the jurisdiction of the court and may issue writs of habeas corpus in cases in which the offense charged is within the jurisdiction of the court. A municipal judge is a magistrate and may issue administrative search warrants.

The judge decided he did have authority to hear the application, and to issue the writ if it were meritorious. To the prosecutor’s credit, he had told me beforehand that if his procedural issue failed, he agreed with the substance of the writ.

And so the judge granted it. I had initially typed up an order, but somehow neglected to attach it to the writ when filed, so the judge kindly signed this hastily hand written order. (Insert joke about lawyer who thinks his petition will fail, doesn’t bother to attach order. Ooops.)

Having attached proof of innocence (client had insurance at time of initial ticket) the case was dismissed and $394 ordered to be returned to client. The clerk told me they will notify DPS, which will not only reverse the $870 surcharge, but actually has a mechanism to refund monies already paid. I will follow up on that, but I won’t be holding my breath.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Reading between the lines from this KXAN news story, “Man Faces Life In Prison for Perjury”:

A Liberty Hill man faces life in prison for aggravated perjury charges after claiming he was innocent following a plea bargain with the Williamson County District Attorney’s Office.

Prosecutors say Markus Peavy had made false statements in his plea bargain and the writ when claiming he was not guilty of DWI charges. Peavy is two years into a 55-year sentence for a fourth DWI conviction.

The defendant must have signed paperwork and been sworn in to give oral testimony at his plea of guilty two years ago – either “in exchange” for an agreed sentence of fifty-five years, or possibly plead unnegotiated, i.e., threw himself on the mercy of the court (not usually a good idea in Wilco).

At some point in the penitentiary, a jail house lawyer either helps him file or files a writ on his behalf, alleging among other things, that he is innocent. A sworn “this is true and correct” affidavit is signed by the defendant and filed with the writ.

Texas Penal Code Section 37.03, Aggravated Perjury:

(a) A person commits an offense if he commits perjury as defined in Section 37.02, and the false statement:

(1) is made during or in connection with an official proceeding; and

(2) is material.

(b) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.

Putting aside general notions of decency, fair play, common sense, judicious use of taxpayer monies and simply grading for creativity alone…? Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley gets an A+ on this one.

You walk into court, swear under oath that you are guilty, and then later swear in your writ that you are not. Seems to fit the language if not the intent of the statute.

But wait a minute. How are they going to prove which was the lie? Was he lying the first time, when he said he was guilty? Or the second time, when he said he wasn’t?

Doesn’t matter.

Texas Penal Code Section 37.06 Inconsistent Statements:

An information or indictment for perjury under Section 37.02 or aggravated perjury under Section 37.03 that alleges that the declarant has made statements under oath, both of which cannot be true, need not allege which statement is false. At the trial the prosecution need not prove which statement is false.

Of course, they’ve already extracted the 55 out of him without even going to trial the first time around. What’s going on here? I think his trial defense lawyer, Scott Steele, hits it right on the nose:

"Maybe they are trying to make a point not to engage in the procedure if they do a plea bargain,” said Steele.

Aha! The chilling effect. Stack a few 25 to life sentences on top of a few defendant’s plea bargains, and you’ll put the jail house writ writers out of business (and maybe some appellate criminal defense lawyers too).

I wonder how long Christopher Ochoa is going to get?

[Update: Guilty. 30 years. Stacked.]

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (8)
• Trackbacks