Summary of a twenty (23) year pursuit for Liberty & Justice
This is a One Page Summary in a timeline. What follows is three pages that provide some elaboration on three phases of this quest. The Criminal, the Civil, and the Obstruction, before proceeding to what can be done now - The Resolution.
Criminal Court process w/ State as Plaintiff
1993: Private Property unlawfully taken by government ('The State')
1995: Deprived of Due Process of Law & Unlawfully imprisoned by the government.
1999: The State admits that what it did was unlawful. Finds Actual Innocence, orders acquittal.
Actual Innocence in this case is obvious from the public record of undisputed facts. By Mandate of 1999 it is also an adjudicated fact that is not (lawfully) subject to any additional court review. This is pursuant to definition of the phrase 'Actual Innocence' pursuant to the common usage of words and as established by our Texas CCA & US Supreme Crt. It is a FINAL finding of Acquittal & Actual Innocence, by the highest Court of Texas. For more see link to Actual Innocence for elaboration on the definition of the phrase.
Civil Court process. The People, via one, as Plaintiff
2000: Citizen countersues, petitions for redress of his grievance established in the criminal proceedings. He does so by exercising his Right to an Open Court (Sec.13, Art. 1, Bill of Rights, Texas Const.)
2001: Summary Judgment for government on grounds the Legislature of Texas has closed the Courts by statutory law. Court closed absent permission from Legislature to enter. (They call it 'sovereign immunity')
2003: Texas Court of Appeals (COA, 3rd) reverses the Summary Judgment. Finds 'Actual Innocence' and, therefore, the permission from the legislature to enter the court and obtain recovery of economic damages provided by statutory law. The Texas Attorney General waives right to further review by allowing time for Petition to Texas Supreme Court to pass. The Legal Obligation of the State is established. See Opinion. Followed by a Mandate. Thus, State waived opportunity for Supreme Court review. No additional review of waiver of suit or liability now legally available to State.
2004: OAG request trial court (aka, 'trier of fact') determine Actual Innocence, pursuant to 103.105 of the Civ.Prac.&Rem.Code of the Compensation for Wrongful Imprisonment Act's waiver of government immunity. [103.105. DAMAGES. (a) If the trier of fact finds that the petitioner is entitled to compensation, the petitioner is entitled to:] Citizen responds by filing Motion for 'No Evidence Summary Judgment'. Judge requests briefs by both and then trial on question of 'Actual Innocence' to determine entitlement to compensation. See Judgment for the Citizen. Again - for 3rd time - Actual Innocence is found for this Citizen.
2005: Office of Attorney General stipulation to liability. That is; admits the State has a legal obligation, a debt, to Citizen and ask for Trail to determine amount. Trial is had and the value of property taken, damaged, and destroyed by government is thereby established. Link the public records of the stipulations
2006: Office of Attorney General (OAG) now ignores prior ruling of COA 3rd, ignores Constitutional and Statutory limits on jurisdiction of courts, and files an illegal appeal again claiming suit against State barred by legislature's 2001 statute asserting State is above the law, cannot be sued (They call it sovereign immunity).
2008: A Justice not on the Court in 2003 now issues a memorandum opinion saying the legislature did not grant permission to sue the State. Although a legal nullity, this has obstructing justice to this victim of government malfeasance. The opinion is contrary to a unanimous opinion by the same COA, the 3rd, in 2003! The 3rd COA in 2008 cannot (lawfully) reverse the 3rd COA's ruling made in 2003! Confirmed by current Chief Justice of this Court.
It also disregards both a recorded oral, and several written stipulation of the OAG! It is obviously contrary to the plain language of the statute and the Authors of the Act of 2001 have said is contrary to the intent of the statute.
The Legislature has the power and the duty to fix this by paying the FINAL judgment
The Attorney General cannot (lawfully) dispute Citizen's Actual Innocence or his Property Loss.
Our Texas Courts found in conclusive, FINAL, non-reviewable and non-reversible Judgments:
The State convicted and imprisoned a man whose innocence was obvious from the beginning; and,
As a result of egregious violations of fundamental rights our Texas Constitution's Bill of Rights intended to secure, property loss (aka a taking) was the result.
The loss suffered by this Citizen from unlawful actions of government, were found by the Texas Courts to be, with post-judgment Interest, $1,404,835.85 by Sept. 2017. It remains a Legal Obligation of the government and, pursuant to the Supreme Law of the Land, the government of Texas has a duty to pay it's debt to this citizen for taking (damage & destruction) of his property.
The Texas Legislature, alone, is depriving this Citizen of Justice