Opinion
NO. WR-69,328-04
11-02-2011
EX PARTE RONALD JEFFREY PRIBLE, JR.
ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. 921126-B IN THE 351ST DISTRICT COURT
HARRIS COUNTY
Per Curiam .
ORDER
This is a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, § 5.
Unless otherwise indicated, all references to Articles are to the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
Applicant was convicted of capital murder in October 2002. The jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 37.071, and the trial court sentenced applicant to death. This Court affirmed applicant's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Prible v. State, 3 S.W.3d 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999)175 S.W.3d 724 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). On November 19, 2004, applicant filed his initial post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.071. We denied relief. Ex parte Prible, No. WR-69,328-01 (Tex. Crim. App. June 18, 2008) (not designated for publication). While his initial application was pending, applicant filed two subsequent writ applications which were dismissed as an abuse of the writ. Ex parte Prible, Nos. WR-69,328-02 and WR-69,328-03 (Tex. Crim. App. June 18, 2008) (not designated for publication). Applicant then filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus. The federal district court found that several claims in that petition were unexhausted, and stayed and administratively closed the federal proceedings in order to allow applicant to seek state court review of those claims. Prible v. Thaler, No. H-09-CV-1896 (S. D. Tex., April 30, 2010) (not designated for publication).
Applicant filed this subsequent application with the convicting court on September 8, 2010. In it, he raises five claims challenging his conviction and sentence. On December 15, 2010, we remanded this cause to the trial court. Specifically, we ordered the trial court to provide applicant with an opportunity to show when and how he obtained the evidence at issue and whether he exercised reasonable diligence to obtain this evidence at the earliest opportunity. We ordered the trial court to determine whether any of applicant's claims satisfy the requirements of Article 11.071, § 5. We further ordered that if the trial court determined that any of the claims satisfy the requirements of Article 11.071, § 5, then the court should proceed to address those claims on the merits.
We have reviewed the application and the trial court's recommendations. We find that the allegations fail to satisfy the requirements of Article 11.071, § 5(a). Accordingly, the application is dismissed as an abuse of the writ. Art. 11.071, § 5(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011. Do Not Publish