Jones, Lydell Anton

           Mo oi-n-ooqao                   •77*- iS

                 XN THE
ORIGINAL   COURT OF CfiZMZ/ML
           APPEALS bF TeLX/IS

             Lyde.ll       t\mxm Jowes                    courtof ce(«A??aLS
                       U                                       SEP 25 2015
            "HE STATE OFTTX/IS , ,                         M ,A



           Tr^.M ^4aiSJ"jrdiri'!al_Di^rt/l/-
            "row -Wn-a^ai^JTidiri'lal Di'sfric/- (Courl- (^ourt ofcriminalap


           TVJWf of Appeals &r +f* _                      Abe/ Acosta c/e u


     PEI IT lOAJ F0f\ DlSCfeTloMARV REVIEW




                                             Udell 4wfe.\iJoMes

\J0 ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED Mm^n^m^^
                         ±DOmV OF PARTIES
                               And couns^L-



Pe4-i4'iON^r                                      Lydeii Ant^nI 3ott-Se.)




                                                3l£hl.MaiN<3fe|-
                                                 Cotfroe.,TetfaS T730(



ft^SDOKldeyls AooeJlafe, toiMScl                Mr, £nK BdTQluwd
                                                300W.OQV(S,Su'ik5lS

                                                fl3M539-&&3 RX
                             TARI E. OF f fiNlTEMTS

IDENTITY OF PARTIES CflUKlSEL.                                  -                     ..,.1

TABLE OFT_Q)\)TENT5                                                                        ii
INDEX OFAUTHORJTTFS.                                   ,                                    if
.STMTNAFMTRFr-.AR^THr-,^Al Aftftl JMFMT^nKfF^ ?
STATEMENT OFTHE CASE                                                                       z
STATEMENT OF PftQCEDURAl HTfiTDR V                                                         2.
JjROUNftFOR REVIEW:
   i. Did The. Appeals £kur|- exr J\J_AmcIiJvi^ -i-hal ffiedvidewc-^ was' \tqai\y
         5uPf idewf -haaas^iw a ziomvICxiom d«u]&lis£. evidence, was wsuAVieuf
         4tiPiioa4V}£i4- Pdrrhbider likiowiMflly p>osS£.drtfa4iw.i awwhilodclgj-fttoto ^ ceil pf)c*ia^5^                                 .3
May l/, Sferte., W S.w.ad),iDl s.et al&4S....,,..                             5
PvtWi i/.Skxfe.fts.w.ad wfr^.App^lattU 0W)aas)..,._.... J                                3
SfepU V.Sfc^ aWS.Ui.3d f^feApp-lirar^ 3a&pe*cWa      ,..                                 -4
TTeMda \/ Sfata35£ S.W,3dti& Cr^.Crm. App 3tfia)                                         7
lJ"W^VXacoU^u.S.|CrilM,i^^                                                              *.

JTATUTES:
TEX.PEMALCOT b.Od.                                 .       .                      .3
 tev. Health &safety cooe^i.i^ ...                                '*•«'..-,    ^ ^ . .-^_;




-I EVAS RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE IdId,^,                                     .3,4,
TEV.KubJfvicI I04fa),             -. _ .                           _ „               n
TtV .Rale.Evid BOi                          . _ .',"-*. -*'- J,\7."" I           Vh
TEyAult.Evidl 90L..,.,                                 _                            n



                                         111
                   NO. Oi-ia-ooqan .
                        IN THE
                 COUKT OFCRIMINAL APPEALS
                        OF TEYA5

                LVOELL ANTON TONE3
                            V
                  HE STATE OF TEYAS
                                      Recpoxidewf


             PeirtioKl 'im Cause K!d. i'3-Oq -
Deliver orMaMuPachirtL a £Wrol(ed SubstaMce. £fc. c^aO-TWixdifekteyl-
 fll6D hod IKree dwrnwceM^ir paragraphs alleging 4iha4- Pefffi'owef had
+hree_ previous -Peiowvj (LDuVfcJiDKls,
 P^ower dM-Wed aplea dP Mat guilty* but- 0kl August &l,aDl3. QJUfy
•foukd hiu quilty after his trial wfk flai?* Oistnet Courf of MoxL/uery
CouKjty. apvV.6 oII. dft. Q*5. After o? pUMfehMeJil +rial 4taju»y fbuiod
al!4Wewhc»m^pQf^                                      Sfirtfavlced PMb^kjr to k5
yfiar5 in mtlblcs DeprjfrUeKrf of driMiwd Tusfice . CA p r?.
Pel-rkoNer Aled a wrfflietf Nofce, of"app&t( om Seplm 14,2013 d/l. 0.133.
                   f&0C£PURAL MTgTjyy;
The judgMoij-of P^bNidf'5 CDNVieflDKi Wfld arid*! DM Av^ud Ai 400
             &Ndl C^)M3l%fDfju4lC65 !<^£S f
             '5  was receivfaq,
 because,fhe.bewailed package wasCfiNcealcd tf/jdNflf ra/iewiflfele.AAV3
pcj l'5oThem is KjbsutTfci^rf evidewcdfo prove, peftftbhler was lortQira for fhis
sealed Mailed package, prior+o fhe.Qmesti'M^ datefJANLWAy 5, 3lOI#J.
FudW Mwne^pefflibKJcr MCVer opeAi fke, sealed Mai Ltd pftckc^^-fhe evidence.
is dearly iMSu#i show fld--
 Vh'i^jer had fhe'iKjfeMf c^d cowsoouSMe&S -fo+rQAiafer or Oliver fhis 36ttldd
 NACuitd package., fopiNiow. pcj IlHi )/There's wo iMi/fisfi gafnrs/ evideuct.
 beifDfehQMdjfp prove pefctowerhad aiviy imWion •ro+raitofer ffi£.pad<&ae,
 orQMv eoNsqousN€ss of whaf wasyw'tthirt repackage; Robert v.Sta-le,eo •
 As (MfcEvaws V.^ate Case_,peWibwer wets fc>ci3iC£illy iNfJiesaMe pDsifio^iN
 arMMejogth pPacoufrolled QabsfaMGLQMd Charaed lo£Caua£_ ^ffv accessibly
 flrroN^aMew-fe,S&TEX. Health &SAfetv cook %4M -1 ia CA); Pdto^-ouk/
 ptcK up a wailed prxk^ge-yfhe euideMce. is /MSLrfPfcieA»f-to show ^Aid prove
 pcWioNar kwevw ^haf ht was pDssEseiMg, fiycM i-f ibt sUe di*«^ei/idej!ic6
 ja^+Qs-fha/did iM fhe. E\/aws v.Stafa. cofle. coMfmbawd was im pfaiMview +d
 Q(xually reye^se.fhe,cbrr|fis flaa'iMpf EvaMS.fhb caSd. Mii^hf wol-haoe beew
  ^p^rlsdi vP CbKjTmbQNri Was aetUallv/ thecal or Ma'il-ed 4o 4e addr^s^ he vuos
  Qf.

                                          3
               GlfOLIkld -for frlVT^W NLlMaer OWeL
                       (LQNTXNbikft
TKe-cjccLC-sSibtlily of fhfi padcagdyflMd^lao fheL^uaKifHy ito'ftapacfcag-e.
does show valid if/ of aw UNlawful possession,bu4Ylrdde3 Mot prove. pehfioMer
wari aware, of whaf h^ was po^eastwa^eveM wifh diredr or- QjrcuM&raM"ha I
£VideKjct_ because, hht Cj3Ki4rcibaKid was tow celled wiffuM a sealed NArJukd
padkage.* Xk) 4he_f^dedex v. Stak, us g.w, 3d 3^5 fhere was flavomkle 1'ighf fo
iIIum'i wftk. 4he £on Vicri on, because cowfmba/od was ftuj^d ima house Mr. Poindetkr
had atC£S3ibii% fi>; SOMe'^sute preSewkd in pefrfomctc fm, bemuse fhc pack
age, had pdtfioMer,N;aMe Ok) if, and peMioaer was in possesstow of fke padk^,
buf "in bafK cases fhem's No suAi'de^f ei:lfifctob +o prove eifW owe. Amused
Con|toII/ isAoMcigeMdwf, or dare overfhc sabefciN^ awd fhaf ffw kNtw+he

Wrtka||+htev,C!eNte/d,rtdaMd cilCUMsU-dl^ftfafe clearly old urfMed-


 *cho». IW pt^wr had ^ imW,dm ok, ***.«, aHM.^baf ^ nS£Lfy
 Jhows (tehhafer in aaseaioN ofihis^Mc^'paiKagc-for-Oiiiy ashad




 refedWj ofatfrfjt. oncost sKoaU be dosdy e^W fc q,4 3*T
                 f^roaidd frirrewipy m^hprfmn
        ftid fbe. Appeals CDarT err i"m AVid im 4Wdk seafpfo awd Stiaite-
       af Pefvfiohier Mail a violafiad of Kiis4™ 'f^iidiA&sh.r^oj^s *£ pM?±
       /ouers s&aled wailed package w66 ^earthed tfMd 5>ei2£a tAjiffoixf'
       se^b'Ki^a vJarraNf ? ^                                             .
       ThtL-firsf £ourf ofAppeals did k\d+ (mlzr Ine opiJvlfoM ortoM^
        to fkMofioh0.for.P\AealriKjQ om 3aKie_ol3,3i0l5; IflavfNg peirhoMer
        \Md-houfaN'y iwdrucHoJOtb preaexrF 4heT7 &.APP, 8ateU>(3
PeJrjibder preftcwlad AMOTION POft REHfcAfitMa May ID,aa$a\dif                   WAS

dewied 073.^33 ,40(5,fJerrhptttf is toof atalefD attack, ffte Vali'dify atfhe.
•ArsrCAuol- ofAppeals dewiai. ftdTjiaier aafcs fhe driMi^l (Wf o^AppeoJLIs
fc evmkt 4he, &raurtd giveA) in f-his ADA fV&M f-he Md+idX) foMxheanKig.
jupporfive Ctees :Cll,^ VfeWfctift U.IO CM.M) lib F3d^)^ U.S v.LolumsI,
3ci7,u.s.a$tt/asi, ci0 S.Cf.'NHttl I0aq»35 L,£Q.aD a29^lWD}u,S.V.aW>£Wii '
4bb U<, IW.((4.l(^S.ci-l^a,to L^d ft (i^j ftottw V-CaliWi453 U.S./




                                      5
                GfQUtjd for rev t'evV NUMber4hcee,
      Dtdfhe. eourf of Appends err im fYwd iwg 4haf kiqfjy prejudicial aud
      iwfleiMataryhearsa^QKld LJMuufheiofiCared iN^ahiOM ddWN loaded fVoM,
      a eellphoKjejerroMeoualy adMrtted by4riQl dDurf iwaS hflrMlese ?
      Whefher a eaurf o-P Appeals 'defiSibNi £Duffiefs vJ4h dNofhereounh aP
      Appeals dWsi'oM ON) ftoUe. siMilao issues is who! pefrriDMeir f's re~
      auesfi'M^ 4he coar4 of CMaiM^i appeals TDOMMiw^Dorsey v/jfafe,
      ASs.w.ad afWg&; alSo6ee.j Murray v. state., &xi s.w.3d aM/3S3,flbd
      May v.sfrte.-Wi s.w.srf W,alSo Se^Tiewda v. Stele., 358 s»w-3d k>33.
       flute Ua.YA^

"HearsayAs aeWeMetfh ofher fhflrt DNe. Made byfhe deelarcuvrr- while hes^ff/Og £Tr:
 TrifllorheariNj,otferd iijQ/cdfiKlcjt-tuprovefheMaikrasseffed T^v,fi.Evid.gO(rd).
rh.s iNdudflrf bofh oral aMd wrrttert aore95iDN5.Te*AB/d.tolfa)a)'MM ouf-
 of-c^urfafafeMewf which is Niof offed fop rave fhefrtirh Df4he Matter asserted
+hdnEL/M, buf is offered -for somc ofho- reasaki,! s rtof hearsay."
5bteMe^; fW tekUt odMiWiort byap^rfy oppoMdw/-arc a/flowo!- hearsay.
T^ff S^/^^'^Ad^flr^J- '.* apa**, w£> Makes a jfafemewfr^R.
  *Z Pib) ,A %teMewf i^DaMOral orwrtftm Verbal expreaaioM or(oi)HQH-
 vemalco^daaf ofapersajj, if 4 is iNtewd&l fy Kim as sabsfrfufiow -Par-Verbal
^prE35.oN.CopiM,DM p^ao)           MEAP^vo^OTOR^ tW.s aaa^iizf wilf
£*+u*f courfoMppeals apiwiwo A*d Murray V.frfftk,«04 s.w. ad aim. ifeWioMtr objeekd


 flemal amsrfng date . MurrayACH s^ JC^a ap|fl-ws ^af toMOuk^d dafci is

^ ^T ^s(fPP«^ labelsfbuMd oMf^Oiii phoMfi.^br^ha^X^bS^id




                                       6
                        Gimuwd for review Nuuberfhree.
                                    c okiTTMiip.r\
pehfiowerjDb teeafio^ wass'idtfs of Adaigr'ifijQ, fhereftre should wo4have
beejo UQed acpiNsf Kim to provefne.Matter asseH-ed. Etepuiy Marfiro feafiffed
iu p£h+io^Tria),abLiiibftuKdepa£^                                    hewae a
drtyj ,iea(erVv4hoL4fiwd:wg aMy NADMey, soMefh'iMqfhal-'LiDuld fwic pdrhoMer
fo adrag pariage aewf froM eali-ft>NOtofoTitosT UOfSey t/,fttafe,<34 a.w.ad
3&Ji HoW tktHhe case was eiofrrdy tircuMftWial, as+tare. were mo eye -
 Wnweases jwhoksfi-A'fcd af fnahThe coMViefiDia ;'n> ttaey Was rei/ersraJ because-
Courf-ft)u»id +he.iUad*fellok heapday kdiukvjy fo bee/freudy prtyudiiual,
 QiveM 4he.«34Kfe/5 4-heory cf4i\eCQSt, aud +1^4fmf iffeuded fo folate ^ede-few-.
SMe fheory c^ere^l bvw£.defk]da,04%Pe4TfoMers case is £wfirefy ejrajMGtaufiJ,
jii^fas pDf-SQjs easewas, aMdftareviewwg tourfhefeCt^^^awfitfy^^iet
by IWrfy Madijj tesHtooMy asdicerf evictee, ThefesfyUwoy htffcw/asjaa+as
pryhdiaal asfhaf in Dor&ey's cas£.,fh'ia is neaarl&biy fii/uular,
Xm PefrfiDK)e.r twff^frial tourf fdied OMUrawaWid fV»d^ce,evideNce,fW
Xu ;"T iNy ^wty/k-VCost.PefrfiDKier received apdeWi*)4heMaib

^, jWI'     li       ft f•! ^   ;     ^f motion . t=.vicieMCe has Kid raei/aNcti-P if is Mb
aL   «,/   /, '. j       ".f'"«-"iuy uuiMatriDue.         iexiaa atbdh. hate QnlfA\
t,ll^lt-Lei"^ is wW ife OroDoNtnf dflius. Abdrotk cSudi-Hon ofari -
4^X* ^"t^T^Y M COMtesf'19 lk rdwtofefl. issudw

Mm'4- protend^W^,"^,^TttHPa^-'i"- f¥ 6h0M

  9w?™V°shPw,^*™+lfft'f;ioW.XM4lif.-neMda case, ulWt.lv
 lP'r™fi tHtWh,ib,t3, wha^ pufporW -fo bt- MyWroaaes




                                           7
                     PRAYER FOR ficbTEP,
  V
     r rhe reoooM slated,fhe. fefrfioKier was dkiied a &>4nal ,-w flous£ Mo,
  .^-OqSla^'WH^ABFQRE^RENAIStS CONSIDERED, Pd-rfio^r huiubly prays
  |0L

  fh«f fbe. Houorabte tetfis Ca^rf of CriMiwa) Appeals would qrad a QMoti £*r


                                                              fully/, su
                                                      slxfcidI4ilrfoji Jade^
                                                      ft* l4oa52,£) foflfWllwiffe.-3.iq)
                                                       




               m            £? rf-i