ORIGINAL PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OR, IN THE ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

especially apt in Mr. Hood’s case, where Judge Holland and District AttorneyO’Connell took numerous precautions and engaged in various subterfuges toensure that their relationship remained concealed. This behavior demonstrates acalculated nondisclosure. As the Gulf Maritime court explained: “Reason is overextended when we require parties to lawsuits to seek a back door, covert, indirectmethod of determining whether a trial judge is disqualified. That burden restsmore fairly upon those with knowledge of potential impediment.” 858 S.W.2d at562. For this reason, whenever a party raises the issue of judicial disqualification,no matter how informally, a court should fully investigate the matter and refuse tosustain an objection merely to the form in which the party presents the challenge.Pinchback v. Pinchback, 341 S.W.2d 549, 553 (Tex. App. 1961). Judges shouldkeep in mind the need to disclose unusual degrees of social affiliation. Whencircumstances arise that may lead a reasonable person to question a judge’simpartiality in a particular matter, a judge has a constitutional obligation to put thepotentially disqualifying facts on the record or recuse herself. Judge Holland did8neither.8District Attorney O’Connell is not blameless in this matter. Separate from Judge Holland, hehad a constitutional duty under Brady to disclose to the defense before trial the existence of hisintimate relationship with her.-20-
PRAYER FOR RELIEFA fair and impartial tribunal is a bedrock requirement of due process. JudgeHolland’s long-term intimate relationship with the elected district attorneydeprived Mr. Hood of this right. Judge Holland was constitutionally disqualifiedfrom presiding over his capital murder trial. Her participation rendered Mr.Hood’s conviction and sentence null and void under the Texas Constitution, anddeprived him of his due process right to a fair and impartial tribunal under theFederal Constitution.ACCORDINGLY, Mr. Hood asks this Court to:1. Stay his execution scheduled for June 17, 2008; and2. Issue a writ of habeas corpus and grant him relief from hisunconstitutional conviction and sentence; or3. Remand the case to the convicting court for furtherproceedings.In the alternative, Mr. Hood asks this Court to issue a writ of prohibitionbarring Respondent Nathaniel Quarterman and his agents from carrying out theexecution of Mr. Hood on June 17, 2008. Finally, if the Court has any concernsabout the relief requested, it should stay the execution and set and file the case forfull briefing and oral argument.-21-
Page 1 and 2: NO. ________IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTSIDENTIFICATION OF
Page 5 and 6: NO. ________IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA
Page 7 and 8: STATEMENT OF THE CASEMr. Hood, the
Page 9 and 10: 427, 428 (Tex. 1998).ISSUES PRESENT
Page 11 and 12: omantic relationship.” Ex. 3 (Aff
Page 13 and 14: ARGUMENTJUDGE HOLLAND’S INTIMATE
Page 15 and 16: Herron, 202 S.W. 797, 798 (Tex. App
Page 17 and 18: assessing judicial bias in this con
Page 19 and 20: lengthy duration of the relationshi
Page 21 and 22: B. FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDSIn
Page 23: an impression of possible bias. Thi
Page 27 and 28: VERIFICATION[***REPLACE THIS PAGE W
Page 29 and 30: EXHIBIT 1
Page 31 and 32: EXHIBIT 3
Page 33: EXHIBIT 5

ORIGINAL PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OR, IN THE ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?