Eduardo CatarLno Palacios was convicted of Murder t
in Texas State Court largely based on False Testimony evidence
and sentenced to 50 years. Petitioner's Mother requested through
the freedom of Information Act an audio tape recording from
the Police in Laredo, Texas r Discovering that the chain of custody
of said audio tape lead to the District Attorny's Office, and
was in the custody of the District Attorney through out trial.
Which had failed to disclose this to the defense. The Habeas
court found through 11.07 section 3 that there were unresolved
issues and called for an evidentiary hearing to resolve these
issues. Through this hearing the Habeas court found that the
District Attorney's office had lost the audio tape since the
trial, But through testimony had discovered the contents of
audio recording .The Court recommended that relief be granted the
on his federal due process rights of a Brady violation and
also ineffective assistance of counsel. The State initially
.opposed this relief under 11.07 section 4 that relief should
be den ied However, Through this Evidentiary hearing Counsel
had shown they met : the standard for 11.07 section 4,The habeas
Court agreed that it had been 'met' and forwarded it to the
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Recommending relief be aranted .
Despite the favorable', ruling from the 'habeas jpourt the CCA
•s Attorney had not filled out the Applica
tion properly and dismissedfound that Petitioner
under Non-compliance with Texas
Rules of Appellate Proc .73.1 Multiple grounds raised on a single

dage and no certificate of compliance documenting the word count.
Petitioner h$d resubmitted the corrected Application and complied
with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 79,2{d)Which does not
violate said rules.

Question 1. Is the Prosecutor allowed to override a Habeas Courts
findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Question 2. Is the Prosecutor aiiow.ed: to use Art. 11.07 Sec.
4 as a means to deny a corrected 11.07 that is only being re
submitted due to prior 11.07 being dismissed for non-compliance.

Question 3. If the CCA dismisses a 11,07 for non-compliance
is there any law or policy or procedure that prohibits one from
filing a corrected Application of habeas corpus.

Question 4 . Is a Habeas Corpus that was dismissed for non-com
pliance with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedures 73.1 cause
a bar for a corrected 11.0 7 under rule 11.07 secton 4.

Was the prosecutor allowed to override the habeas court's findings of fact and conclusions of law?