IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
IN CAUSE NO. F89-96282 FROM THE
CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NUMBER 3 OF DALLAS COUNTY
ORDER
This is a subsequent application for habeas corpus filed pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 11.071, Section 5. Applicant asserts he is entitled to a new punishment hearing because his trial counsel did not completely investigate his background to present mitigating evidence to the jury.
Applicant was convicted of capital murder on September 27, 1989, but this Court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial. Applicant was again convicted on June 14, 1994. We affirmed the conviction and sentence. Wilson v. State, No. 71,947 (Tex. Crim.
Wilson -2-
App. February 12, 1997). On June 2, 1997, applicant filed his initial application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.071. We denied relief. Ex parte Wilson, No. WR-40,348-01 (Tex. Crim. App. March 31, 1999). Applicant admits that the legal and factual basis for this claim was available when he filed his initial application but asserts that he is allowed consideration of this subsequent claim because he did not fail to exercise due diligence in attempting to but failing to obtain the information before his initial application was filed. We disagree.
We have reviewed this application and find that it does not meet the requirements for consideration of subsequent claims under the provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 11.071, section 5(a)(1). This subsequent application is dismissed as an abuse of the writ and the Motion for Stay of Execution is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF MAY, 2006.
Do Not Publish