Writing wrongs

Remigio A. Martinez,III. Rt. 2 Box 4400—Hughes #1191578 Gatesville;Tx 76597 ‘WRITING WRONGS BY Remy Prisons are full because of wicked behavior. I will show you the evilist reasons for overpopulated Texas penitentiaries. On March 16TH, 2002, I was jailed for: resisting arrest: tampering with evidence, criminal mischief "B", and possession of a controlled substance 1. Three—hours after my arrest officer Bryan Duane Warden added an attachment claidato patrolman Vicente Gonzales‘ offense event report3. The additional allegation asserted that I squeezed Warden's testicles while being handcuffed. So, "Assault on P.O.”-—which carries a more severe penalty than resisting arrest——was added to the arrest sheet's list of charges. In due course it will be shown that this was not the first—time officer Warden had made such an accusation. My bond was posted March 23RD, 2002 € Having left Nueces County jail I returned to my home business——Giant Productions? in Bexar county, San Antonio,TX. By Octoberi the bondsman had become perturbed over my irregular reporting. Still, no reason to re-arrest me existed. * Footnotes on pages 59 & ilO WRITING WRONGS — 2 But then a housefire happened on October 18TH, 2002, in Bexar county. Six—days after that fire a Nueces County Grand Jury indicted6 me for the March 16TH, Port Aransas arrest. Meanwhile Bexar county arson investigators named me as a suspect fortflmafire. So now, S.A.P.D., bounty—hunters, and other agencies were given reason to apprehend me. All during that time;though, I had already been living and working in San Diego, CA. 1 In California future problems arising from officer Warden's bogus assault claim were realized. When San Diego Police learned that Nueces county authorities had issued,"Attempted Murder/Aggra- vated Assault," warrants 8 for me they believed them. So to keep that narrative alive SDPD recorded my arrest as,"Battery On A Peace Officer," and,"False Imprisonment with Violence."S9 These California charges were dropped since they were not trugiz But they were, made—up because ofife resisting arrest that Port Aransas police trumped up to assault on p.o. And which prosecutors finally transmuted into the most serious allegation possible. After my extradition to Texas. I found out how this was done. Remember the "attachment" officer Warden filed 3—hours after patrolman Gonzales arrested me? Well, prosecutors alleged that Warden cannot,"...get an erection now." This is the same serious bodily injury Warden said he suffered in 1999. Three—years before he helped arrest me. Old electronically stored medical recordsll WRITING WRONGS -3 scanned on,"Aug—l2—l999," at,"O4:O8," prove this. In order to use the same accusation in my case, the 1999 physician's report was printed—out. and then handstamped with the date,"APR O3 2002." Since Warden had done this before he knew to add the assault accus- ation the night of my arrest. Thereby guaranteeing the misdemeanor offense——resisting arrest-would become a felony. Police and prosecutors did their parts. Now it was the public defender's turn. At our first——and only——meeting attorney Randall Pretzer immediately said,"We need to see what they offer you." Meaning an offer of reduced prison time from prosecutors for me to plead guilty. Although I exclaimed to Pretzer that I never squeezed officer Warden's testicles. He refused to listen to me. Obviously this meeting went badly. It ended with Pretzer requesting to be taken off the case. ,Another lawyer——Mark H. Woerner—-was appointed as defense counsel. He too kept saying that police and a doctor would be believed by a jury before I would. To quote Mr. Woerner,"I,"...at no time disputed the alleg- ations that the 2nd [tampering with physical evidence] and the 3RD possession of cocaine] counts were based on." This proves vfihat I kept denying the assault accusation. Still, Woerner insisted I should plead guilty. °éeing mentally ill, Woerner's insistence discouraged me. Not wanting to spend the rest of my life in prison—-for a false . . . . l accusation——I listened to Woerner. In an affidavit Woerner WRITING WRONGS — admitted he,"...advised [me] to accept the State's offer due to the fact that there were multiple witnesses [i.e.police] to attest to these facts and none to refute them, as well as [his] belief that the officer's injuries would likely have resulted in a punish- ment at the higher end of the range." Woerner made that statment. Even though he knew patrolman Gonzales’ offense event report never recorded Warden being assaulted. Years afterward what Warden had told Gonzales that night came to light. According to Gonzales, Warden only,"...advised...," him that I,"had put a cello-phane baggie with possible cocaine in [my] mouth." Strangely enough Warden didn't tell Gonzales he had been hurt. It took even longer until. an article in the San Antonio Express News exposed Nueces county prosecutors for falsifying evidence in numerous cases: at the same time I stood trial there. I never would have been convicted and sentenced to 20—years for aggravated assault on a public servant. If Woerner had prepared a defense. Don't forget about the San Antonio housefire., While inf Nueces county I was told that Bexar county wanted me for arson/habit- iq93. So I ended up back in San Antonio. Matters only got worse there. Due to the false aggravated assault on a public servant convi- ction——and pending arson case——my mental state detiorated to an incomprehensible depth. It got so bad that attorney Selena M. Alvarenga requested a competency hearing and mental evaluation. «WRIT ING WRONGS — 5 This can benefit a mentally ill defendant or work to their detriment. Psychiatric personnel found me competent to stand trial. The doctors, of course, are paid by the State. And their interest is to close the case. So, even if a doctor knows a defendant does not understand what's happening——but the doctor says they do-—then this all but guarantees mentally ill defendants can be wrongfully convicted. At sentencing the court used prior convictions to decide punish- ment. The pre—sentence—investigation (PSI) report showed I had a conviction. for,"Theft of stolen property from a grave/human =corpsee," out of Harris county. I have never had such a conviction. So attorney Selena M. Alvarenga told the judge as much. Then she said: 5 He was in fact convicted of theft 6 of a person out of Harris County)... (14) When the judge asked;"Theft of stolen property from a grave human corpse. He didn't do that?" Ms. Alvarenga answered: 15 MS. ALVARENGA:No,Your Honorlhe was 16 convicted of theft of a person,State Jail felony and‘ 17 he did get two years,State jail felony. I (14) Again, I have NEVER been arrested/suspected/convflflxxi/nor served time for abducting a person in Harris county Txl5. Still these previously controverted facts were used against me. -Eunishment was assessed at 35—years. The court knows these falsehoods prejudiced sentencing but refuses to offer relief. Decisions in post conviction attacks fly in the face of precedent law, and the court's own trial record(s). Even more the arson conviction has never been entered into DPS WRITING WRONGS — 6 , . . . . 15 or FBI criminal justice records . Yet the most profound erroneous fact of this arson case is in its judgment of conviction . I stood trial for the property offense of setting a housefire. No one was named as being there. The charge alleged that: on or about the l8TH,day of OCtOber;A.D-/2002/REMIGIO A. MARTINEZ hereinafter referred to as defendant,did then and there INTENTIONALLY START A FIRE by IGNITING GASOLINEIAN ACCELERANT AND COMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL WITH AN OPEN FLAME with intent to damage and destroy a HABITATION/KNOWING THAT THE HABITATION WAS WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE INCORPORATED CITY OF SAN ANTONIO; (17) At trial judge Mark R. Luitjen stated: l2 THE COURT:MR. Martinez,you are indicted 13 for the offense of arson of a habiufiion... (18) Despite this the judgment of conviction reads: Arson—Habitation/ PLACE OF ASSAULT with a deadly weaponlg. These differences matter because a crime against a person ensuxs more time served in prison than a property offense. So authorities exaggerated‘ the arson by adding aggravated assault elements to its final judgment. This means that eligibility for supervised release may not happen until a minimum of l7%—years are served. Next, the address on the indictment IS NOT the house I was convicted of burning. Neither was it listed on my TDL, Assumed Name Certificate5, or bond address. In fact, the address on the indictment has NEVER caught fire. I know who owns that house. Obviously these fabrixfljons are meant to secure lengthy sent— { WRITING WRONGS — =7 ences. It doesn't take a legal scholar to see this. Not only have officials made rulings contrary to precedent law, and pre- vented post—conviction appeals from being filed. But the 35~year sentence has been extended too. The court still owes 460—days time—served toward its completion. In an order signed August 7TH, 2006, 245—days credit were awarded. After a motion was made on my behalf. That motion inadvertently left—out all unaccounted days though. So a second Motion Requesting Additional Credit For Jail Time Nunc Pro Tunc2O was mailed on September‘ 22ND, 2006, by attorney Rudolph Brothers, Jr. The court has never ruled on this 2ND motion. Denying these,"days—served,{_adversely affects my parole eligibility and final discharge dates. How so? Because I must re—serve those days which should already be calculated ’towards my release. Then, twelve—years after this last conviction. A Bexar county court records searchzl revealed that someone else was in jail using my identity; while I awaited trial. His charge was DWI in County Court 6, cause no. 893365. On 07/24/04, 3—months before my arson conviction, the case for inmate SID no. 826460 was closed. My SID no. is 538003. As incredible as this sounds a simple web-site search will confirm it. Clearly Bexar county public servants want to exact retribution for the perceived injury of officer Warden in Nueces county (i.e. a public servant too). And retaliate for the Bexar county based WRITING WRONGS - 8 attorney and bailbondsman who bonded me out of Nueces county jail. But by creating the fictious arson—assault judgment, just to keep me in prison as long as possible. These overzealous judgments end up costing taxpayers roughly $20,000.00—a—year to confine me. Besides that, the greater evil to people is corruption. What if somebody needs a right—ruling in a non—criminal case? Like a fore- closures action or breach of contract claim. With officials holding authority to make false judgments with impunity. No «one can expect fairness. So without the fabricated aggravated elements added to); both convictions; I would have been eligible for supervised release within 8—years from sentencing. Since I am mentally ill a medically recommended intensive supervision plan, including elects" ronic monitoring, could have been approved years ago (e.g. pursuant to Texas Government Code § 508.l46)- Thereby saving hundreds—of- thousands-of—STATE—dollars— The intentional ignorance of legal ethics to correct these "errors" has been detrimental to my rehab- ilitation. And is undoubtedly the reason why Texas has the country's largest prison population. All of this is too wrong to right.