Opinion
NO. WR-65,627-02 NO. WR-65,627-03
12-17-2014
EX PARTE DAVID SANTIAGO RENTERIA
ON APPLICATION FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 20020D00230-41-02 IN THE 41ST DISTRICT COURT EL PASO COUNTY Per curiam. PRICE, J., filed a dissenting statement in -02. ORDER
This is a post conviction application for writ of habeas corpus and a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to the provisions of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.071.
Unless otherwise indicated, all references to Articles are to the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
In October 2003, applicant was convicted of capital murder and, based upon the jury's answers to the special issues set forth in Article 37.071, the trial court set applicant's punishment at death. On direct appeal, the Court affirmed applicant's conviction, but reversed and remanded for a new punishment trial. Renteria v. State, 206 S.W.3d 689 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). After applicant's punishment retrial, the trial court again set applicant's punishment at death. Applicant's punishment retrial was affirmed on direct appeal. Renteria v. State, No. AP-74,829 (Tex. Crim. App. May 4, 2011)(not designated for publication).
Applicant timely filed in the convicting court an initial application following his first trial. That application is numbered WR-65,627-01 in this Court and is ruled upon by separate order.
--------
Applicant timely filed this application for writ of habeas corpus in the convicting court following his punishment retrial. Applicant presents 19 allegations in which he challenges the validity of his conviction and sentence. The trial court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law recommending that the relief sought be denied.
This Court has reviewed the allegations made by applicant. Allegations 1 through 9, part of allegation 11, and allegations 13, 15 through 17, and 19, all involve claims that challenge the validity of applicant's sentence as imposed in the punishment retrial and therefore constitute an initial application. Art. 11.071. This initial application is numbered WR-65,627-02. Allegation 10, part of allegation 11, and allegations 12, 14, and 18, all involve claims that challenge the validity of applicant's conviction as determined at the guilt/innocence phase of applicant's first trial. Because applicant has already filed an application for writ of habeas corpus challenging the validity of his conviction as determined at the guilt/innocence phase of his first trial, these claims constitute a subsequent application. Art. 11.071 § 5. This subsequent application is hereby numbered WR-65,627-03.
The convicting court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law and recommended that relief be denied as to all of the claims. We agree with the convicting court's recommendations and adopt its findings and conclusions as to allegations 1 through 9, the part of allegation 11 pertaining to applicant's sentence, and allegations 13, 15 through 17, and 19. Accordingly, we deny relief on allegations 1 through 9, the specified part of allegation 11, and allegations 13, 15 through 17, and 19. Allegations 10, the part of allegation 11 pertaining to applicant's conviction, and allegations 12, 14, and 18, fail to satisfy the requirements of Article 11.071 § 5(a). We dismiss allegations 10, the specified part of allegation 11, and allegations 12, 14, and 18, as an abuse of the writ without considering the merits of such claims. Art. 11.071 § 5(c).
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014. Do Not Publish