Mendoza v. Director, TDCJ-CID
Decision Date | 23 April 2019 |
Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:09-cv-86 |
Parties | MOISES SANDOVAL MENDOZA, Petitioner, v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ-CID, Respondent. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas |
Petitioner Moises Sandoval Mendoza ("Mendoza"), a death row inmate confined in the Texas prison system, filed the above-styled and numbered petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He is challenging his capital murder conviction and death sentence imposed by the 401st Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas, in Cause Number 401-80728-04, in a case styled The State of Texas vs. Moises Mendoza. For reasons set forth below, the Court finds that the petition should be denied.
Mendoza was convicted and sentenced to death for the capital murder of Rachel Tolleson, who was killed during the course of an attempted burglary, kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault. Based on the jury's answers to the special issues set forth in the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 37.071, the trial court sentenced Mendoza to death on June 29, 2005. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the conviction. Mendoza v. State, No. AP-75213, 2008 WL 4803471 (Tex. Crim. App. Nov. 5, 2008). The Supreme Court denied his petition for a writ of certiorari. Mendoza v. Texas, 556 U.S. 1272 (2009).
Following direct appeal, Lydia Brandt was appointed to represent Mendoza for purposes of state habeas corpus proceedings. Brandt filed a habeas petition raising seven claims, including five ineffective assistance of counsel claims. The trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law without conducting an evidentiary hearing. The trial court recommended that relief be denied. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied the application based on the findings and conclusions of the trial court and its own review. Ex parte Mendoza, No. WR-70211-01, 2009 WL 1617814 (Tex Crim. App. June 10, 2009).
Brandt was subsequently appointed to represent Mendoza in the present habeas corpus proceedings. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus was timely filed on June 2, 2010 (Docket No. 6). An amended petition was filed on January 5, 2011 (Docket No. 23). Mendoza raised the same seven claims that he presented in the state habeas corpus proceedings. The petition was denied. Mendoza v. Thaler, No. 5:09cv86, 2012 WL 12817023 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 28, 2012). A certificate of appealability was granted on four of the claims.
Mendoza timely appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which stayed the proceedings and remanded the case, in part, solely to appoint supplemental counsel and to consider in the first instance whether he can establish cause for the procedural default of any ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims pursuant to the Supreme Court's recent decisions in Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012), and Trevino v. Thaler, 569 U.S. ___, 133 S. Ct. 1911 (2013), that he may raise, and if so, whether those claims merit relief. Mendoza v. Stephens, 783 F.3d 203, 203-04 (5th Cir. 2015). The instruction to appoint supplemental counsel was the product of the Supreme Court's decision in Christeson v. Roper, 574 U.S. ___, 135 S. Ct. 891 (2015).
Jeff Haas was appointed as supplemental counsel (Docket No. 76) on May 7, 2015. Pursuant to an order of the Court, Mendoza filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus (Docket No. 86) on November 4, 2016. The State filed an answer (Docket No. 89) on April 3, 2017. Mendoza filed a response (Docket No. 94) on July 13, 2017.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals discussed the factual background of the case as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial