EX PARTE ROY LEE BRYANT, Applicant (Other)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. WR-14,886-13 EX PARTE ROY LEE BRYANT, Applicant ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS CAUSE NO. 7887 IN THE 29TH DISTRICT COURT FROM PALO PINTO COUNTY Per curiam. ORDER Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of aggravated robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment. In his present application, Applicant raises three grounds. This application, however, presents a more serious question. This Court s records reflect that Applicant has filed eight prior applications pertaining to this conviction. It is obvious from the record that Applicant continues to raise issues that have been presented and rejected in previous applications or that should have been 2 presented in previous applications. The writ of habeas corpus is not to be lightly or easily abused. Sanders v. U.S., 373 U.S. 1 (1963); Ex parte Carr, 511 S.W.2d 523 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974). Because of his repetitive claims, we hold that Applicant s claims are barred from review under Article 11.07, ยง 4, and are waived and abandoned by his abuse of the writ. This application is dismissed. Therefore, we instruct the Honorable Abel Acosta, Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals, not to accept or file the instant application for a writ of habeas corpus, or any future application pertaining to this conviction unless Applicant is able to show in such an application that any claims presented have not been raised previously and that they could not have been presented in a previous application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Bilton, 602 S.W.2d 534 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980). Copies of this order shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division. Filed: February 6, 2013 Do not publish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.
