HZO-tE
COURT QP CRIMINAL APPEALS DF T2XMS
AUS T)Kl TEYAS
ORIGINAL
MAR, EAR JW. ACOSTA*.
ENCLOSED FdA FILlN&tS TH£ DRl&lM^L ANO(t)]6N£ COM OF APPELLANT- PETlT/OA!£j{
PETIT/OM FOR &ISLRETWKIARY REVIEu"
PLEASE GIVE MOTILE UPDkl RECEIPT,
THAWK YOU RESPECTFULLY FOA YDUA AlSHTAHCE.
RECEIVED IN StkiCEABLy
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
LANT^-fftlt,Tiofln~wwii
APR 06 2015
Abel Acosta, Clerk
LbuRT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS
AUSTM TEXAS
HELVIN FiVhlAOE MlEHAM
AWELLmT-PETlTlbHEK ,
V. EDA HUMER /3-/4-E>AJ92-Crf
7HE &TIA7E Of TEXAS
APPELLEE -RESPONDENT.
PET/ 7/0/U toA LDISCRETIDNAM AEl/IEU
PlTlTlDHEA-AmiLhtiT COMES mcoMPUMcE OF APPELLATE AL/lES DP T0JE STAT£AA' TFXASAAA£LLA7£
PROCEDURE IN ORDER TO ASSERT THAT IKE /3TFI COUATOP APPEALS UAS LJAML/N ITS MCJSIOA/ ro
kmPW THE t(SN\llLTIOk\ Of THE TRIAL LOUAT OF THE 33?TH DlS7«(C1 LDUR7 E-PUFtAA7£>M£0vMTy,TX.
lE&al Analysis
THE LOU'AT 0F APPEALS INITIALLY LOME-JAMS THATPtTITIDMEA EJ/fSEMVICTIb Af f/ULWC TO C0A7ALYMTMS£X
OFFEHDER REGISTRATION AiEOUJAEJA£MTE IMtiFA T£X. £#££ EM/y. AA6C 4/Va/- MA ^J. /0Z&)&(3) M/IX
ENhahceaieNT Paraeaaphs... The c.o.a.boes not £aovwestatuteiad Padafaly' ljmemtTsmm,
tc
TUE TfilAL COURT PUMISHElS TAE OFFfMSE AS A FIRST-DE&REE FELONY'VMM/lA7.£J. /&Z&)/??£*{iy
STATES "TU£ NEXT NIEMEST DECREE OF FEIONY^UHICH HAS NO PROBATIVE S.TAN&ARDSAMT#£S£tJf£NC£
ENHANCEMENT PURPOSES WATS FIXED BY THE STATES INTENTIONS TD USE PAlORS AT TN£S£MT£NC/NE
PHASE... THE SOLE PURPOSE FOK SumiTTINE^JFOUR PREVIOUS PLEA BAR&AM MldZS LtlTH AN AOOITIOMAL
[X\ PRlORS. ..TOTALLIMELE) SlY PRIORS, PREJUDICED PETlJimH AT 7N£ ABUSE OP DISCRETION' SWEE BY FU£
TR\AL CDOM AMD iMCOyyifiETFAICE Of THE TRIAL COUNSEL TO ABANDON Wt 0&T£CWAJ' E>£ 7UE/A/O/CT/AIHT
\NHEM ATTEMPTING TO CHALLENGE THE SUBANTT/NE 6P TNE ADDITIONAL PAIORj, CMVICTJOMS INDtOEA fAA
TUE STATE Tb SATISFY ITS ftE&ISTRATION CNAME.., INHERE IT FAIL TO AD SO &U£ roXt)£XA/AATioM
OFbUTi TD REGISTER. ART.02.lDl. MB FAILURE TO CO/vftlV U/TH A?££/S7AATJEW A£&UIJ?£W£MTS,
AT (A) ART.Ll. IbX UERE GENERAL PENALTIES ADA WM-E0MAL1AMCE £K/ST UNDER Sc/BCAAPTEA C FJHICH IaJAS
bURWL TRIAL, MOT THE EASE-IN-CHlEf TNEDRISTIC MDICTAIEN7 SUA 7NEWEREFACT £MA 7... PETITIONER
AID Hbl MDTlfY THE FORMER USHARTOt! PDUtE DEPARlmEHTOFFICIAL IN A TIMELY AHA77£A£A 7DAYS..-
UPON mELUM'PETITIONER IHTENTlM TD CHAH&E ALSIOEMT MERE HE RESIDES IN 7AEJAn?£
UHI1 UlTH CORPORATE mm AH^miiS b^ 5il^&mAHM£N7UNt^ t^L MSA/mamiNT
AUTHORITY IN THE SAME
MUlCi/VtLITY MILRL TAB .^PETITIONER RESIDES...THE BRIEFS AND PRESENT ASCOAOS OR JlDEhtT. . .
ON IaMEIHER LRU ENFbRCEWENT OFFICIALS TO LJIT: EL CRMF6 mMESTl&ATEh OR CONSULT U/TN THE FOA/n£A
LAU) DP AUTHORITY OFFICIAL THAT 5N<£ REPLACED,, PPlOA TD NOTMlM THE STATE aA
PKOSSCOTDR ID PROCEED /N ENFORCING, SUCH MINOR INFRACTION WAT COUU) HAHEBEEN RESOLVED.
PETlTlDRW/nnW POINT OFEAAOK IS THESTATE AND CM PAJMAY AFAJON TO AFP/AM' JUCM EMWC7/M
&ASED SOLELY AAJ PESlBlNE IN TN£ SAME AiUAlC/PALITYAS SO JMAlE EJN£A£OI/ZAZEAL-
~ DUS ENFORCEAJEAJT IS QUESTI0MA8LE DA/ ITS FACE., . U>»£N SOW£ C/ACUJTC0UA7S bJJU A£V£AS£
SUCH PRIORS, USED DN... ftbTH£NHANCEPi£NT PROCEEDINGS BYTHE TRIAL E0UA7CDMSE&UENFiY
BECAUSE A MOTION TD UlTHhRAU &UILTY PLEAS LJOULD HAVE JSEEA/£AAN7£DYf TNfSUFFICIENT
PACTS, ON THE RECORD TD ESTABLISH EhCN ELEMENTOP WE OFFENSE MOULD HAVEBEEN' CHAUEA/AED
ANB APPELLANT-PETITIONER. PLEAS UAS INVALID, SEE.'COMMON' U£ALTU V.LOAiMC ,-VC3
rnnss. toil °iit m.e. &d 17,3 Patass./o/jiP
WHATS HOT HAVE ISEEN REASONABLE CONSIDERED &i THE APPELLATE COURT IS THE LEVEL OP
PERSPECTNE.UHICH LJAS S.IUENI ON THE BRIEFS AND RECORDS WHEN DETERMINING SUCN
ELlCrlQIUTV LEVEL FDA PE&ISTAATIOM P£OUiR£ir)£NT T7/A7'P£7/7WN£A DID No7 AOS£ A- A/sAOf
RE-DFPEN.SE OA A DANGER TD THE PUBLIC INHERE THE SPtSOPFEND£A AEO/STAY ACTAUOUSA
JUbOE (TRIAL COURT) IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES TO AELIEVE ASEX OFFENDER PAOAI SUCH
hb£RESl\JE REGISTRATION AE0OIREAIEN7S, 3UT DOES NOT />EArn7 A JUDGE: (miAL Et>UAT) To
ORDER SUCH REGISTRATION UHlCI-t IS &UESTIOHARLE JUDICIAL LAU TD ENFORCE UN£N " THERE
INAS NO STATUTOAY SUPPORT FOA POSITION'".IJHEN 7N£ STA7ES SERAINED PAASIME OF TNE:
TEIT" Vpi' UNTENABLE"SEE I COMMONUAALTIY V. VSMTUAA. ftS MASS JlE)3.,?87 M£, ??S ME, Ac! 73 I'/h*ss.AoA3n PCSAMM in
CONFL IC TDISA GPEEMENT THATSATISFIES THE YNlTiAL AND STANAAAB AEl/IEU INAET/YEA 7H£COURT Of
APPEALS DECISION CONFLICTS MTFt ANOTHER COURTAA APAEAU DECISION ON ZN£SAMEISSUEEtMEAl
h\)L\i REErlSTRY' bPiD hMS APPLIED TO APPELLANT PETITIONER BY 7EXAE SEX OFFENDERS AEE-LS7AY ?n>
KEEP THE Rfi&ISTfY CURRENT INHERE PETITIONER*'AESIDEINOT^ESIDED 'IN THE SAmEAlUNICfiALITY
IaIITHIM 7 DA1S...DR FACE STATE PECULATION THROU&H THEDPiPE&ISTRATIDN P£6>UIA£A7EN7S
UNDER STATE LRU) AT THE DISCRETION DP TAE PPOSECUTOA OF ANY &H/ENSTATEJ££PUA//T£JS sm£S
V, MURPHV. OS HP.3d 7n (IOTA CIA. ADUNSUPPORTED BY UN/TEA STATES V. LUNSFPAD v7AS F.Sd
%$% ($TH CIR. A0J3). THE SPECULATIVE INTENT TO PESIDE IN WE SAAIE AAEA Of MUN/ciMCiry
r-DR PA\LURE TD 6-IVE NOTICE TD LAD ENfOACEWENT//OFFICIALS UOITHlN 7DAYS ARIB
RESULTS IW A