Opinion
No. WR-67,495-01 WR-67,495-02
Delivered: August 19, 2009. DO NOT PUBLISH.
On Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus in Cause No. W02-53582-M, appeal from the 194th District Court of Dallas County.
ORDER
This is a post conviction application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, and a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, § 5. Applicant was convicted of capital murder on April 23, 2003. The jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 37.071, and the trial court, accordingly, set punishment at death. We affirmed the conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Ochoa v. State, No. AP-74,663 (Tex. Crim. App. January 26, 2005). On February 11, 2005, applicant timely filed in the trial court his initial application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.071. On February 21, 2005, applicant, pro se, timely filed a "Supplementation to the Initial Writ to be Filed for Post-Conviction Relief." Applicant's initial writ and supplement were received in this Court on May 26, 2009. On March 19, 2007, applicant, pro se, filed in the trial court what he called an "Application to Supplement Writ on Habeas Corpus Pursuant to Article 11.071," and it was forwarded to this Court on April 25, 2007. In his initial writ, our cause no. WR-67,495-02, applicant presents 10 allegations challenging the validity of his conviction and resulting sentence. In his pro se supplement to the initial writ applicant presents 2 allegations. The trial court did not hold a live evidentiary hearing. The trial court adopted the State's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that the relief sought be denied. This Court has reviewed the record with respect to the allegations made by applicant. We adopt the trial judge's findings and conclusions. Based upon the trial court's findings and conclusions and our own review, we deny relief. Applicant's March 19, 2007 filing, our cause no. WR-67,495-01, is a subsequent application that must be reviewed under Article 11.071, Section 5(a). We have reviewed the four claims which allege the capital sentencing scheme is unconstitutional. Applicant's claims fail to meet the dictates of Article 11.071, § 5. Accordingly, we dismiss his subsequent application. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 19th DAY OF AUGUST, 2009.