Lawrence James Napper v. Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
1). Whether the court of criminal apeal's was invioaltion
or not filing and ruling on all of this petitioner
grounds of error that the Court of Grimial Appeal
choose was not necessarry for him to file and drop
His brady v. Marylandand Actual innocence claim he
file in his first application and was it to be con
sider successive writ of his prior writ of habeas cor
pus back in 2012.
2) . Wh&tKelEs Napper ' case captures the doctrinal Brady v.
MAEylahd claim, by the State dna crime lab destoyed all
the dna sample collect from off of the victim in his
c'sicase.
3) . Whether Nappies case captures the doctrinal Brady v.
Maryland, and His Actura.l Innocence claim in Ex'parte
Brooks, 219 SW.3d 9, Tex. Crim. App 2007 and Schlup v.
Delo, 513 U.S. 298, Article 11.07 4 (a) „ (2.) )and Article
11.071 5 (A) 2. (1995). explain in his motion.
Whether the Fifth Circuit erred in dismissing the petitioner's appeal for lack of jurisdiction