Summary
This document is a pro se correspondence from William E. Johnson to the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals concerning an alleged denial or nonreview of habeas corpus and mandamus filings. The writer asserts due process violations and requests identification of the judge allegedly responsible for denying review.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the court improperly refused to file or review Johnson's post-conviction habeas corpus materials.
- Whether the alleged refusal to review or act on the filing violated due process and the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Factual background
William E. Johnson, an inmate at the C.T. Terrell Unit, claimed that he was being illegally imprisoned without a conviction by a state agency. He alleged that a court had refused to review or properly process a habeas corpus filing and requested the name of the judge involved so that he could pursue a judicial-conduct complaint. The document consists primarily of Johnson's correspondence and does not independently make factual findings.
Procedural history
The document is a per curiam court filing reflecting receipt of William E. Johnson's letter. Johnson asserted that a court had denied, without a written order, a filing he had not made and had refused to review a writ of habeas corpus filed under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.07. The provided text does not state a judicial ruling resolving those allegations.