Ex parte Contreras

Ex parte Contreras · Texas Court of Criminal Appeals · February 17, 2015 · No. WR-80,635-02

Summary

This document is the State’s Motion for Rehearing in Ex parte Abel Acosta, concerning Dana Marie Contreras’s habeas corpus application in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. The State asks the court to reconsider its order remanding the matter for an evidentiary hearing and instead grant habeas relief and remand for a new sentencing hearing based on evidence that a trial witness recanted prior testimony.

Court
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction
Texas
Decision date
February 17, 2015
Docket number
WR-80,635-02
Procedural posture
The State filed a motion for rehearing challenging the Court of Criminal Appeals' February 4, 2015 order remanding Dana Marie Contreras's habeas proceeding for an evidentiary hearing. The State requested that the court reconsider the remand, approve agreed findings of fact and conclusions of law, grant habeas relief, and remand for a new sentencing hearing.
Precedential value
none
Parties
The State of Texas v. Dana Marie Contreras
Disposition
other

Topics

habeas corpusstate post-conviction reliefappellate procedurecriminal procedureevidence

Practice areas

Criminal lawPost-conviction habeas corpusAppellate procedureEvidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Court of Criminal Appeals should reconsider its February 4, 2015 order remanding the habeas proceeding for an evidentiary hearing.
  2. Whether the court should accept the agreed findings and conclusions, grant habeas relief, and remand for a new sentencing hearing without requiring live testimony from the relevant witnesses.

Key quotations

Based on its extensive investigation, the State concluded that the recantation is likely truthful and the trial testimony was likely false.
The State requests that this Court reconsider in the interest of justice its order to remand the case for an evidentiary hearing.

Factual background

At Dana Marie Contreras's 1997 trial for killing Neal Winegar, ten-year-old Sueleta Andrews testified that Winegar had not sexually abused her, and the testimony affected only the punishment verdict. In a 2013 affidavit, Andrews recanted, stating that Winegar had sexually abused her and that her trial testimony was false. The State investigated the recantation and obtained additional affidavits and counseling records that it characterized as corroborating the recantation and agreed that Contreras should receive a new punishment trial.

Procedural history

Contreras sought habeas corpus relief and a new trial on punishment based on a recantation by a child witness who had testified at the 1997 trial that the victim had not sexually abused her. The State investigated the claim, concluded that the recantation was likely truthful and that the trial testimony was likely false, and agreed to findings recommending a new punishment trial. The Court of Criminal Appeals nevertheless ordered a remand for an evidentiary hearing on February 4, 2015; the provided document is the State's motion asking the court to reconsider that order.

Remand instructions

The motion requests that the court grant habeas relief and remand the cause for a new sentencing hearing. The provided text does not state the court's disposition of the motion.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…