IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-80,099-01
EX PARTE KEMOS MARQUE BARNABY, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. 09-04-04192-CR
IN THE 221ST DISTRICT COURT FROM MONTGOMERY COUNTY
Per curiam.
O R D E R
Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleaded guilty and was convicted of two counts of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced to fifty years’ imprisonment in each count. He did not appeal his conviction.
Applicant contends that his due process rights were violated because a forensic scientist did not follow accepted standards when analyzing evidence in his case. This case is one of many cases affected by a forensic scientist who was found to have not follow accepted standards when analyzing evidence. This Court addressed these cases in a recent published opinion. Ex parte Coty, 418 S.W.3d 597 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). In Coty, this Court established a two-prong test to determine whether a due process violation occurred in a case handled by a forensic scientist who has been found to have committed misconduct in a different case. Applicant has the burden to show that the evidence utilized in his case was false, although there can be an inference of falsity in cases such as these, and that the false evidence was material. Applicant pleaded guilty in this cause. The State concedes that Applicant has met his burden to infer falsity in this case. The issue at hand is whether the false evidence was material to Applicant’s guilty plea and conviction.
We order that this application be filed and set for submission to determine how materiality should be analyzed in a guilty plea situation. The parties shall brief these issues. Oral argument is permitted.
It appears that Applicant is represented by counsel. Applicant’s brief shall be filed with this Court within 30 days of the date of this order. The State’s response shall be filed within 30 days after the filing of Applicant’s brief.
Filed: June 18, 2014
Do not publish