Ex parte Gilbert

Ex parte Gilbert · Texas Court of Criminal Appeals · February 4, 2015 · No. WR-17,545-19 and WR-17,545-20

Summary

This document is Steven Dwayne Gilbert’s pro se objection to the trial court’s findings and conclusions in Texas habeas corpus proceedings under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.07. He argues that the trial court miscalculated his sentence credits and requests an order awarding approximately 20 months of flat-time credit and directing his release to mandatory supervision parole.

Court
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction
Texas
Decision date
February 4, 2015
Docket number
WR-17,545-19 and WR-17,545-20
Procedural posture
Applicant filed an objection to the trial court's findings and conclusions in an article 11.07 habeas corpus proceeding concerning alleged denial of flat-time credit for confinement under pre-revocation parole warrants.
Precedential value
No precedential value established; the source is an applicant's objection rather than a court opinion or disposition.
Parties
Steven Dwayne Gilbert

Topics

state post-conviction reliefpost-conviction reliefhabeas corpussentence modificationappellate procedure

Practice areas

state post-conviction reliefcriminal procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Gilbert was improperly denied flat-time credit for time spent confined pursuant to pre-revocation parole warrants.
  2. Whether the trial court misapplied the evidence and relied on an unreliable affidavit in recommending denial of habeas relief.

Factual background

Gilbert was serving a 30-year sentence and claimed that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice failed to credit him for approximately 20 months spent confined pursuant to pre-revocation parole warrants. He relied on TDCJ time records and a manual time-calculation form, asserting that the records showed 24 years, 7 months, and 21 days of prison credit but did not include the disputed flat-time credits. The trial court relied in part on an affidavit from a TDCJ classification and records supervisor and found no unresolved error in the sentence calculation.

Procedural history

The State responded that nothing was wrong with the calculation of Applicant's sentence, and the trial court initially recommended denial of relief. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals remanded the writ application after determining that, if true, Applicant's claim might entitle him to relief and directed the trial court to make findings regarding alleged denial of flat-time credits. On January 27, 2015, the trial court again recommended denial, after which Applicant submitted this objection.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…