Frank, Sherman Marvin

In The Texas Court Of Criminal Appeals And for It's Juatices,At A0stin T0x&~ Ma vi n Fr.::. n !: ShE. r man Complainant/RElator Trial Cuase#810774/810774-C Versus, Texas Court of Crina~ A~peals John/Jane Doe,Actin~ Trial C a s e Wr i t ti: Court's Judge,for the 339th -~-----·--·----- District Court of Harris - County,Tex&s,et al:Lin6a Garcia, As ~"'UD'l""'Hi ~.1.1..:J "'1·:-··lc .~. --'-~ of.""'"':"'·--·!.-,·;- i~.._~.-.i. .... LGo- . .1·- D~ct-- .1.-.~ ·tLte~~e.·n\\n~n R~fi \Jlltb~bUWlbJ.YI UU~ r j_ c t 1'. l: torr. e. y ( T .:o ;; • Be. r I . D • it 0 0 7 8 7 1 f~f~ fRO . 6 • . · . a~llft Q tor- Horris county Texas ; L e s 1 i 2 He r.n.-:. . . umenL contams so_m®COURT Of CIPliMINAl Rrrgt\Y9 dez,Assuming Deputy to Criminal p~~~-~ atar~ofp~orqualnilf . UAR 09 2015 Tria 1 , uno E:: r c h r i .s Da n i e: 1 , e t a 1 . . . &Uue ~~ 1tbe of tmagmg. ra Resj?ondsr.t ( s). R~lator's Ori~inal Applicantion For A-Writ of Mandamus,Pursuc.nt To S~ction 22.22l(b) of th~ T~xas Government Cod~~ .. Let There be un~erstandin~!as Relator com~s before th~ T2xc.s Court of Crimin&l App£als jUstices,Res2on~2rit·(s) 6£ interst : R~l&tor ic in 2ursue of his requests for a Writ of Mandamus in his in6ividual - Persona propria capacity statue or.Pro Se standinge,pursuant to Articl~ r,§l2- of the Texa~ Constitution and Article ll.07(3)(b) of the T~xa~ Code of Criruir1~l Procedure.DeLeon V.Districk Clerk,Lynn County~l87,473,474-475(Tcx.Cr.App.2006). However,Mt~vi~ Frank Sh~r~an1Relator h~reir. after,brin~s hi~ wai1t of the appli- cation for a Writ of Man~amus as~inst tri~l Court's Officers mentioned abov2,as I a whole or in6ivi6ually seperatsd in intentionally using the wrong proce6ural 6DC suspending the the Writ of habeas cor~us under colorab~e Constitutionbl vio- lation claims raisc6 within Relstor'e hsbeas cor~us p2tition-Applicaticn,along - w~t~ his merucrBr1dum of law c.ttach~d therewi~h~Inparticular with Relator's Ground- On€ Error of law that Presents the issue of the Trial Court art6 it's presidipg- jtidge's lack of subject~~.atter jUrisdiction over the cause number 810774 and P~r- ti~s of interGst.But that cause of action is founded on a fraudulent and forged --~ indic~me~t.Thus,the trial judge acts fell clearly out side of it's subject-ruat- ~~er ~urisdiction,-which are acts beyond th2 scope of law or } udicial authoritj- 7(and without anJkind of lawful ~u~gm~nt ,commercial pa~er~work,contra~ts,nor pro- of of ~laims,and those OtTRA VIRES ACTS cann6t ·be recojrriz~d as Vblid j~dicial~ " ·act._ ;f I2.w.Hence,l:his i~..suE: 2ub ~uci.cc.· _is not betona the 'I'exa.s .. Cour<:: oZ CriiLliEc.l I ~"~~AJ?fJE::ol-s justices rE:oach ano C:ocs have oriyjill'llal ~lQJ(".iS~ie:'t:l«:llfi over i.:he said cauSE:· & -,.~ .. RartiE.s of int~fE;st'$0 c.s .to- cor,siaer·Relc.tor's application lor issuirt'::j oi the:. ~Writ of Mandc.rnus~in· [~]hiQ trim~n&l legal rnc.tte:.r,pursuant ~o Article:. S,§SA o f - the Texas Constitution,w:1ich ma.l<;:e thf: justices part of the .Juoicia;:-y Act,a.s too disputes wh i c h h a vt-.' a r i .sed o v e.~.: -. t h Eo · en f o ·-~ c "'"n-, ~ '" · · t es ~over~Eo d b i ti12 Texas ~ n ·L·- .o f. scacu Code of Crimin~l Prc~edure:,~an.-o~-L,hl'ch • .~.-rl'sc - ~ - ~s -~ r.~sulLL ~ r o~-or-1nc1ocnt to a ~ •. ' ' ~- 1 • fleaain~s-­ fo~ ]Urisdiction,there is no other provision to compell said Cou~t's officer(s) to execute its duty in ac~bcd~nce with the laws of the State of Texas,and ther- byJCourt's Officers are denying Relator's clear and absolute riyhts to his rel-- ief sought.Inwhich the merits of his Constitutional violations claims are bey - ond dispute-a clear right of-his that necessitates that .which the law plainly - establisehes in that 6uty sworn to .by the Clerk(s) OR AND JUDGE to be perform - ed .. Such that there is no room for the[ir] exercise of discretion,but a mandato- ry duty~Id.at 174-75; New York Life Ins.Co.V.Brown,B4 F~3d 137,142,n.l0-12(5th Cir.l996);Cf.Ruiz V.Quat~rman,S04 F.3d 523,527(5th Cir.2007)(same),and Cf.Ex- Parte Clear,573 S.W.2d 224,suor~(Tex.Cr.App.l978),~n ~art: "A di~trict Court [judge] without having jurisdiction iinvoked ,can-not asume another JUd~e's properly exerc- . ised Jurisdiction over the Case.~to: conduct a hearing-"Id. I Thus,it is the trial Court's JUc)ge who possess sol1e authority/jurisdiction over-· 3.mandamus. this Relator/Complairiant ... Thus,in this Case at bar,the trial Court has not acted upbn the Relator's habeas coruus petition,and instead,has had its clee- r·k ( s k. or and Ms. Hernandez deviate from the correct procedure of due course of law,and have served the wrong and illegitimate Person-''a Linda Garcia,actiny- on the stationary of the District Aoorney to Harris County,of Texa6,as an ass- istant's capacity and said illegal intru~er,implies her submitted bas~less & improper-unlawful motion-brief,-was the STATE'S ORGINAL ANSWER on 2/12/15 and was pret}are6 by a Joshua Redelman-Intern.who neither had·prior trial Court's and its ~u69e's authorization to submit such bo~us and unfound distortion~ •. Then those illegal invited third uarty interveQers submitted another fraudul- ent proposal of facts and conclusions ~o law.Entitled: "STATE'S PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLSUIONS nF LAW"- Signed by Linda Garica on 2/16/15 ... The fact that the legal Respondent of in- terest has not even been served means this is andther case of fraud upon the - Courts.As in reality cited in U~s.V.Winestock,34d F~3d 200,207,& n.7(4th Cir.- 2003),citing DUNNS V.Cockrelli302 F.3d 491,492 &.~~1(5th Cir.2002)(Per Curiam), cert. denid, u.s. ,~23 s.ct.l208,154 L.Ed.2d 1013(2003):Boonie V.Elrod, 706 F.Supp.6j6,638~39(N~D.rll 1989)(same points in baseless motion practice);- Kn6~ V.Johnson,667 F.Supp.512,515-22(W.D.Mich.l987)(same),aff'd in partinbnt- ~art,977 F.2d 996,104(6th Cir.l992),cert.denied,ll3 s.ct.l4,15(1993),and see- for realistic accurances are nation wide in,Goka V.Babbitt,862 F.2d 646 1 650-52 (7th Cir-1998) ,Appellate Court seeking direct considerations o·f sanctions aga- nst Prison Officials lawyers,for such perpetrated fraud-upbn~the Courts[as in - this Case at bar]during the collateral review proceedings'~Id.And at Winestock,- 340 F.3d at 207,& n.7,supia .... Hence,this Relator states for the record that- he has no adequate remedy at or· in the law to ~ursue his re4uested relief he seeks-other than with [t]his application to appeal the Clerk(s) or JUd~e's or- Hernandez's a=tions or inactions ,this vunue or ~ihcle satisfys his showing- of his lack of habeas corpus relief is grounds for man~amus to issue against - the Responent(s) at fault for such unconstitutional deprivation of rights to- be enforced.Furthermore,only the Texas Legislature has the right to suspend - statutory laws.i.e.Texas Constitution~Article I,§28.DeLeon,supra.l87 S.W.3d at 475,& 1-:2 .. B) The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals justices have original juirsdiction to is- ·sue the[ir] Writ of Mandamus in this cause under Article 5,§5A of the Texas Con- sitution and Article 4.04 of the Texas Co~e. of Criminal Procedure.In this perso- nal proce~ure may comtemplate the the trial judge,an~ it's Court's employees - will.have knowledge of the specific changes to be made .and the correct process of service to order,and in the manner of making them,which is evidently legal- and proper under the law.Becuase the proper and le~al procedures under Article- 11.07,§ 3(b)(TCCP)-that requires services by the trial Court on the Warden of- the Mark Wavne Michael Prison Unit,in Anderson County Texas,as a man~atorv - 4.mannamus. command of law.and arty bther procedure applied was1as is1the result of purpor- ted illegal irregularities1thus.is v6id ab irtitio ... Also1the fact that ihe tri- al ·cour_t and its Officer ( s) HAD CHANGED ·the writ of habeas corpus to an Apt)ell- eartt's direct'appeal brief1with out JUrisdiction it/they exceeded his/her autho- rity(·s) by unilaterally deciding to change Rel~tor's want of habeas corp~s stat- us~and thus1codifed the unnecessary result of suspending.the writ of haheas cor-: pus. GUERRA .Wl;ARZA 1987 S .W. 2d 593 1 SUf.Jra·( Tex. Cr. ApJ? .1999 );Cf. The Texas Fair Defe- nse: act~eff.l/l/2002(SB 11§8)1§1 of SB 71id. C) Linda Garcia.as assuming to be the STATEiAND throuqh Joshua Redelman,has comffi- tted constructive misstatement of ~acts and law in her/th~ir b~seless brief.In- that Relatoe claimed more thari just a void sentence1but void trial Court's and it's Judge's Judgment is void1for ruling upon a fraudulent indictment un~er cau- se nu:8107741and Relator is not merely allegi~g ineffective assitance of counsel but Constructive. breach of fiduciary duty-by hi~ State Trial Court Appointed def- sel Counsel.In fact Garcia has falsified facts that Relator has not raised1an~ has intercept~d~conficated~and is holding hostaged Relator's actual plea~ings of the trial Court's and it's jtidge's judgment is void ab initio1for factually pro- ceeding to trial when its jurisdictional defect prbhibited that Court/jud~e from- entering any type of judgment.Muchless give authority to falsely imprison an in- nocent Man.as this Relator sub JUdice.Plus~these issues stated by Relator have - never been brought in an appeal J?reviously.Apart from Relator's issues out forth- in his .application and memorandum haviny claims that are not waivabl~ of forfiet- ed bv procedure errors.As they ar~ JUrisdiction and Constitutional issues prese- ed in ~cod faith.Consequently1Article ll.071§41does not bar Relator/Applicant ~ from presenting his ApJ?lication for a Writ of habeas corpus1ad teStificandum1and having it heard and acted on by both trial Court1]udge and this Appellate Court- 's Justices1because those issues are ~hallenges to the trial. Court's JUtidiction. AS such1it falls within the exceptions for subs~quent application of a writ of - habeas corpus .'rherefore 1 all the false statements of Ms ~Garcia, need to be .• s,trickeil from the record1hecause her amicus curiae intervention is illegal1and Relator's application for a writ of ·habeas cbrpus submitte~ four weeks ago1it's memorandum attache~ therEwith.be incoroorated by reference as set. out entirelv herein conn- ection with this mandamus application1aaainst an~ upon the trial Court's Judge - or an~ its clerk(s) OR AND M~.H~rnandez1for constructively denyinq Relator his riahts to have his 0rit of habeas carouse acted uuon the true issues he uresented. And thus.a clear abuse· of authoritv1which is a manifestly 'a manistrial'act in- nature.State ex.rel.Eidson V.Edwards,793 S.W.7d 117 & n.6-7infra(~ex.Ct.App.l990). Wher~fore premises duly considere~,this Relator prays that this Appellate Court JUstices arartt this application and issue a writ of m~ndamus directing the said trial Cburt's ]udqe or its Clerk or and Leslie Hernandez1the respondent(s) in - this Case sub judice to serve the leqal Rescondent,Holding Relator under unlawful and illegal imprisonment.according to their correct Court procedures within 20- aa,•s of en~rv of this sai6 Cout'R Or~er,as to confirm the trial Court's judge's S.manaamus. oral ruling, 'if not documented on paperJand as to have establish~d Service up·· on Eddie D. Baker (or his dis iy ee/ suce(:;;sor) , a no thus, serv i c~::: of ·process executed- on th~· &ctual Pbrson,individual R86~odent of int~r8st,as t~~ Stat~'s ~ovenment's Official or Ayent· in .the rnanntr proscribeCi by afroementioned State of Texas law for se~vin0 s summons and or iik~ process on that Respondent(s)~And any othe~ m::l ~:f e~::~l::i:o ::~d t~:p:~~:::. ~o~:t ~:s ~~::~cos de om· anD in which ~~~l;: J fit, Executec on...,. ;3d:: his Ci~~ / o~: /l&..""Tch 2.015, R":::S_t?e:ctfull1'" SubmiL:t0o ~~~~~~ifN ,Relator under a TDCJ~s account numb0r00876556,dn inhabitant ofthe Mark Wayne Michael Unit,2664 F.M.2054,Tennesse~ Colony Texas 75886-Located in AndErson County of the State of Texas- ... Affidavit of Certificate of SERVICE L/ia..li/1£;/ >}c//)lc.t/L Mavin Frank Sherman,do certify and affirm under penalty of oer)urv that all I have stated is True,correct,accurate and complete in the above and entitled,and cause.numb~~[810774],and these same st~ted tacts were sent too the trial Conr s R.o~odents, on t' 'll~ da7 of11W<12~l5, nursuan!!: Texas Civil Practice & Remedy Code,§l~2.001-132.0n3 . . . . .~~ ~~~ Relator-PrVo Se caoacitv . 3/3 ;;Je / ~~- 6.mandamus.