 |
Blind Eye |
 |
|
|
Justice IS Indeed Blind |
| Cruel and Unusual | ||
|
Mark Kent Ellis, Judge Shaun (nonshooter) indicted as "the shooter". Found guilty of capital murder, received life in prison. Shaun's appeals were denied. THE STATE OF TEXAS VS. SHAUN B. SANDERS FELONY CHARGE: CAPITAL MURDER HARRIS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT NO: 351st IN THE NAME AND BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: The duly organized Grand Jury of Harris County, Texas, presents in the District Court of Harris County, Texas, that in Harris County, Texas, SHAUN B. SANDERS, hereafter styled the Defendant, on or about JULY 12, 1997, did then and there unlawfully, while in the course of committing and attempting to commit the Burglary Of a Habitation owned by Phyllis Shelby, intentionally cause the death of Phyllis Shelby by shooting Phyllis Shelby with a deadly weapon, namely a firearm. AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE. Foreman Carl Buffort FOREMAN OF THE GRAND JURYINDICTMENT
THE STATE OF TEXAS WINDEON DEMANE SANDERS CAPITAL MURDER HARRIS COUNTY DISTRICT COURT NO: 351st IN THE NAME AND BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: The duly organized Grand Jury of Harris County, Texas, presents in the District Court of Harris County, Texas, that in Harris County, Texas, SHAUN B. SANDERS, hereafter styled the Defendant, on or about JULY 12, 1997, did then and there unlawfully, while in the course of committing and attempting to commit the Burglary Of a Habitation owned by Phyllis Shelby, intentionally cause the death of Phyllis Shelby by shooting Phyllis Shelby with a deadly weapon, namely a firearm. AGAINST THE PEACE AND DIGNITY OF THE STATE. Foreman Carl Buffort FOREMAN OF THE GRAND JURYINDICTMENT |
|
| Ellis Rulings | ||
|
Ellis had no alternate jurors chosen; two jurors did not want to remain in the trial. THE COURT: For the record, tell us your name. THE JUROR: Lois Moore. THE COURT: And Milton, my bailiff, had informed me that you have a scheduling conflict. THE JUROR: Tomorrow. THE COURT: I need you to tell us about it. THE JUROR: I need to be at a board meeting at 1:00 o’clock tomorrow if at all possible. THE COURT: And, it’s for the hospital district? THE JUROR: Yes. THE COURT: How long does it last? THE JUROR: Till about 5:30, 6:00. THE COURT: It’s not going to happen. THE JUROR: Okay. THE COURT: I’m sorry ma’am. And as we talked about, we thought this would be over. THE JUROR: I know. That’s what I thought. THE COURT: It think it will be over tomorrow. I’m hopeful it will be over tomorrow. I’m sorry. There’s really nothing I can do about that at this point. THE JUROR: Okay. THE COURT: If you need me to tell somebody that --THE JUROR: No. That’s all right. I’ll take care of it. THE COURT: We’re going to try for 9:30 again tomorrow. Would you mind if I Just have Milton ask them if that’s okay? MR. EASTERLING: That’s fine. THE COURT: If you’ll go back with Milton, and then we’ll take care of that. THE JUROR: Thank you. A JUROR: Julius Labardini. THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. A Juror: I wanted to see if I could get out of this. Being the sole provider for a family of four, I just really can’t afford to be off a week and get me lights cut off next week or something. I don’t know if you had alternatives picked. THE COURT: We didn’t have any alternatives picked, Mr. Labardini. Before I became a judge. I was on jury duty for four days. I have a family. And financial distress, while understandable, is not an excuse for jury service. I wish I could tell you otherwise, but it is not. We’ll do it as quickly as we can and try to get you out as fast as we can. There’s really not anything I can do about it. A JUROR: I just had to ask. THE COURT: But there’s nothing I can do about it now. A JUROR: Okay .
Ellis rules in favor of motion filed by Windham--not allowing jurors to know Windeon's verdict and sentence If you testify in the case, your testimony cannot include ----- and I’m telling you directly you cannot tell the jury what you were convicted of or what your sentence was. Now, it’s not relevant to Shaun’s case and-- because they have to decide what Shaun did, if he did anything; and what happened in your case doesn’t have anything to do with what they’re going to do in Shaun’s case. And, they may find him guilty of the same charge; they May find him guilty of something else; but what ever they decide will Be in part of what you have to say, obviously, and what you have to Tell them about the case. But that cannot include what you were sentenced to or What you were convicted of. Do you understand that? A PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, sir. THE COURT: Now, also, just for good measure, I guess I should tell you that if you do not follow my order that I can hold You in contempt and give you up to six months in the County jail For doing that --- which I know is devastating to you at this point. But, I need to tell you that. That is a possibility. Do you understand that? A PROSPECTIVE JUROR: Yes, sir.
Ellis is inconsistant with his rulings Mr. Easterling: May I proceed, Judge: The court: Sure Mr Easterling: Judge at this time we’re at lunch. The jury is not in the courtroom. I abided by the order of the court on the State’s motion in limine that I could not ask Mr. Windeon Sanders the result of his trial, what he was convicted of, what kind of sentence he received. PAGE 173 I think that now that the State has vigorously cross-examined him and particulary on the issue of whether this was an intentional killing or not that he has opened the door and it’s more probative than prejudicial of any issue in this case that the jury knows now what Windeon Sanders was convicted of and what his sentence was. So, I’d ask permission to ask that in front of the jury, Your Honor. The Court: That will be denied.
Admitted a tape that had been doctored by the prosecution's admission and an autopsy report that was changed on the stand. --see Dr. Murr's section for testimony regarding the autopsy report.
Admitted the "oral statement" although there was consistent evidence of misconduct, improper procedures. --see the officer's section for testimony regarding the investigation.
Shaun’s indictment named him to be the shooter yet he denied the motion for dismissal or reduce sentence. NO. 758050 THE STATE OF TEXAS -IN THE DISTRICT COURT VS. -OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS SHAUN SANDERS - 351ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT MOTION FOR INSTRUCTED VERDICT COMES NOW, SHAUN SANDERS, the defendant in the above style and numbered cause and respectfully moves the Court for an instructed or directed verdict and in support thereof the Defendant submits the following: I. The State of Texas has failed to prove each and every element of their case in chief and/or there is a variance between the allegations in the indictment and evidence offered by the State of Texas. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the defendant respectfully prays that this honorable Court will instruct or direct a verdict of not guilty. Respectfully submitted BY: Danny Easterling DANNY K. EASTERLING
MR. EASTERLING: Judge, I have a motion for instructed verdict. I’ve filed with the Court. I’d ask the Court to grant it particularly on the Issue of capital murder and submit this case solely on the charge of Aggravated robbery because the State has wholly failed to prove a case of Capital murder by parties on Mr. Shaun Sanders. The court: The motion will be denied.
Honorable Ellis knew people had changed their testimonies, admitted Latoya had changed hers yet Ellis knew the girl was, for one reason or another, was should not have been allowed to testify; he admitted she is not testifying consistently and knew the tape would not clarify the issue in question. He could have sided with the defense or could have stopped her after the 20th inconsistency or "I don’t know" or "I don’t remember" and stated she is not capable of standing trial. --see Latoya's section for inconsistency Ellis received a letter requesting a new trial. It would be denied. NO. 758050THE STATE OF TEXAS - IN THE DISTRICT COURT VS. - OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS SHAUN SANDERS - 351ST JUDICIAL DISTRICTORDER On this the_22 day of April , 1999 came to be heard Defendants Motion, and it appears to the Court that this Motion should be GRANTED
Mark Kent Ellis JUDGE PRESIDING
|
|
http://www.freewebs.com/blindeye/harriscountycrimelab.htm| Response to the Writ Of Habeas Corpus | ||
|
Yet, Ellis signs the charge from the 11.07 nearly six years later for ineffective assistance of counsel.
NO. 0758050-A EX PART IN THE 351ST DISTRICT COURT SHAUN B. SANDERS OF Applicant HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS RESPONDANT’S PROPOSED ORDER DESIGNATING AN ISSUE Having reviewed the application for writ of habeas corpus, the court finds that the issue of whether Applicant received ineffective assistance at trial needs to be resolved. Therefore, pursuant to Article 11.07, 3(d), this court will resolve the above-cited issue and then enter findings of fact. The Clerk of the Court is ORDERED to transmit a copy of this order designating an issue to the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Clerk of the Court is ORDERED NOT to transmit at this time any other documents in the above-styled case to the court of Criminal Appeals until further ordered by this Court. By the following signature, the Court adopts Respondents’s Proposal Order Designating an issue.
SIGNED on the __7__ day of __Jan_, 2003
Mark Kent Ellis ______________________________ Presiding Judge, 351st District Court |
|
| Bad Judges exist. We all know they do. | ||
|
Very few practicing lawyers are willing or able to expose Bad Judges publicly, for they are at great risk when they must later appear again before the exposed Bad Judge. Exposure of rotten judicial apples offends and embarrasses the entire judiciary. When a lawyer, in diligent pursuit of his client's interests, dares stand up to Bad Judges, the "system" locks arms, and seeks to punish or suppress the iconoclastic lawyer. The system's resistance to admitting the existence of a bad judge can be astounding. Yet someone must stand up to challenge this cancer within the Judiciary. Bad Judges need to be weeded out. It is to the fair, competent judges that the following is dedicated. Before you go before a Judge, try to learn the Judge's record! Check to see if complaints or comments are on file. Courtroom Monitoring Case Research Investigation [Newspaper Databases, Law Library etc.] Ask local practitioners Ask national court reform advocacy groups such as NCFC For new Judges with no track record, listen to other cases in their courtrooms before losing your right to disqualify. To Change A Judge Before The Trial: READ CASE LAW REGARDING JUDICIAL BEHAVIOR DURING TRIALS PEREMPTORY DISQUALIFICATION DISQUALIFICATION FOR CAUSE (RECUSAL)
REMOVAL TO ANOTHER JURISDICTION CHANGE OF VENUE MOTIONS TO DISMISS BEFORE MERITS ARE HEARD
DELAY IF JUDGE IS ABOUT TO BE ROTATED OFF OF CASE FORMAL COMPLAINTS
BAD JUDGES
|
|
| © 2003 Blindeye |
Create a free website at Webs.com
|