November 13th, 2015
CLERK OF Court of Criminal Appeals From: John Gray ''
P.O. Box 12308; Capitol Station Boyd Unit - 475245
Austin, Texas 78711 200 Spur 113
Teague,Tx 75860
Re: APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS, In re John Robert Gray
from the 230th District Court of Harris County,Texas, of postconviction
writ application number 481656-E.
Dear Clerk,
Enclosed please find and file 1-original APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
(4 pages including the certificate of service to Hon. Judge Brad Hart, ex-
eluding this cover letter), and bring it to the immediate attention of one
of the latest elected judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Thank you.
cc: file
Hon. Brad Hard, District Judge
This document contains some
pages that are of poor quality
at the time of imaging.
RECEIVED IN
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
NOV 1 7 2015
Abel Acosta, Cieri<:
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS
AUSTIN, TEXAS
IN RE §
JOHN ROBERT GRAY § NO.
------------------------
APPLICATION, FOR· A· ·WRIT OF· MANDAMUS
I. JURISDICTION
The Court of Criminal Appeals and each j~dge thereof has
proper jurisdiction, power and authorization to grant and issue
a writ of mandamus to a criminal district court judge ih crimi-
nal law matters pursuant to Article 4.04, Section l, Code of
Criminal Procedure.
II. FACTS
1. Under postconviction writ number 481656-E in the 230th
District Court of Harris County,Texas, there-are three appl~ca
tions: (l) original (first); (2) "Amended Application ... " (sec-
ond), and (3) "Second· Amended. Application ..• " filed during the
year 2015 and after August 25th, 2014 and after Applicant com-
pleted the Jury sentence of trial court Cause 481656 on August
09, 2014.
2. On July 06th, 2015, Judge Brad Hart of the 230th Dis-
trict Court signed an order adopting the State's proposed order
for filing an affidavit and ordered the General Counsel for TDCJ
to file an affidavit in response to each and every· five grounds
raised by applicant [within THIRTY'DAYS of the signing of the
order], but the TOCJ General Counsel has faVled or refused to
comply with the Court's order as of the below date of 11-13-15.
3. On 9-21-2015 Applicant wrote a letter to Jud~e Hart
1
to voice his co~plaint of be~ng denied due process and access
to courts based on the claim by one of the district courtcclerks
that Postconviction Writ Application Number 481656-E does not
exist in the court's computer system or files, but the judge
has thus far ~failed to·take any corrective action to comply
with Art.ll07, Section 3 (c) or (d), Code of Criminal Procedure.
4. Applicant is entitled·to a recommendation by the trial
court to grant habeas corpus relief as a matter of cl~arly es-
tablished state and·federal law, where it was·not until after
August 9th, 2014, when he lawfully completed serving'the Jury
Sentence of Cause No. 481656·and discovered the factual and
legal basis of the pending 5-Grounds which were previously un-
available on or before August 25th,2015, when the BPP extended
its jurisdiction of Cause 481656 by charging-and convicting him
of a new felony and sentenced him to prison to the date of
10-25-2025 w·ithout the· possibility. of eligibility for actual
release to Mandatory Supervision from prison (the first ground).
III. ARGUMENT
For purposes of Art.1107, Sec.4(a)(c), January 28,2015,
is the documented date in which the Board of Pardons & Paroles
(BPP) made its final decision to rev6ke Appl~cant•s release to
Mandatory Supervision based on the blue-warrant of arrest on
August 25th, 2014,[which was after the Jury Sentence maximum
expiration date of August 9th, 2014, governed by Texas Gov•t
Code Section 508.143 (a)(b)]. Therefore, postconviction writ
applications under No. 481656-E squarely· focuses on the 'admi~
nistr~tion of the sentence of Cause 481656' by the BPP is not
2
a second or successive writ application. In re Cain, 137 F.3d
234 (5th Cir.l998). Applicant has no oth~r adequate remedy at
law under Article 11.07 to enfor~e Section 3(c} wh~ch appears
to be a mandatory duty to be performed by the trial court and
owed to Applicant. In re Wells, 252 S.W.3d 439 (Tex.App.-[l4th
Dist.] 2008. Without findings of fact and conclus~ons of law
by the district court the Court of Criminal Appeals will norm-
ally ignore the unlaw£ull'and unconstitutional restraint of
Applicant by denying the application without wr~tten order.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, Applicant respectfully
requests for the Court of· Criminal Appeals to grant the appli-
cation for a wr~t of mandamus·with an order or instructions to
the presiding judge of the district court to immediately con-
duct findings of fact and conclusions of law on the Grounds
and memorandum of law presented by Applicant in the Second
Amended postc;:onviction writ application and any other relief
the Court deems proper and just in the public interest and in
the interest of justice.
November 13, 2015.
(Applic~nt pro se)
Boyd Unit - #475245
200 Spur 113
Teague, Texas 75860
3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above [APPLICATION
FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS] has been served to Honorable BRAD HART, District
Judge, 230th District· Court, 16th Floor, Houston, Texas 77002, by placing'
same in a sealed postage pre:paid envelope and mailing same on this the
13th day of November, 2015.
't!llA-e
~Robert 7 Gray
(Applicant pro se)
Boyd Unit - 475245
200 Spur 113
Teague, Texas 75860
4