EX PARTE KARL EUGENE CHAMBERLAIN SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF

Annotate this Case
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS 
OF TEXAS 

WR-46,058-03 & WR-46,058-04 
EX PARTE KARL EUGENE CHAMBERLAIN

SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS,

APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION, AND

MOTION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION

IN CAUSE NO. W96-48383 FROM THE 
291ST DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY 
Per Curiam. Price and Holcomb, JJ., dissent.ORDER

We have before us an application for writ of habeas corpus, a motion for leave to file a writ of prohibition, and a motion to stay execution. Applicant/relator asserts his execution will violate his Eighth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment.

Applicant was convicted of capital murder in May, 1997. We affirmed the conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Chamberlain v. State, 998 S.W.2d 230 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999). On November 30, 1999, applicant filed his initial application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Article 11.071. We denied relief. Ex parte Chamberlain, WR-46,058-01 (Tex. Crim. App. September 13, 2000). Applicant moved to reopen his initial application, but his motion was denied without written order on November 21, 2007. Applicant then filed a Suggestion that the Court Reconsider Motion to Reopen on its own Initiative, and on May 13, 2008, we denied his suggestion to reconsider his initial application. Applicant filed a subsequent application on May 19, 2008. We dismissed the application as an abuse of the writ. Ex parte Chamberlain, WR-46,058-02 (Tex. Crim. App. June 2, 2008). Applicant now claims that the chemicals used by Texas during execution by lethal injection would violate his Eighth Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment.

We have reviewed applicant's subsequent application and find that it should be dismissed. See Ex parte Alba, AP-75,510 (Tex.Crim.App. June 9, 2008). We have reviewed the application for writ of prohibition and leave to file is denied. See Ex parte Chi, AP-75,931 (Tex.Crim.App. June 9, 2008). Applicant's motion for stay of execution is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2008.

Do Not Publish

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.