The opinion
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-94,707-01
EX PARTE ALLEN ANDRE CAUSEY, Applicant
ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
CAUSE NO. D-1-DC-91-915672-A IN THE 331ST DISTRICT COURT
FROM TRAVIS COUNTY
Per curiam. Schenck, P.J., filed a dissenting opinion joined by Finley, J.; Yeary, J.,
filed a dissenting opinion. Keel, J., not participating.
OPINION
A jury convicted Applicant of murder in 1992 and sentenced him to fifty years’
imprisonment. The Third Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Causey v. State, No. 03-92-
00378-CR (Tex. App.—Austin del. Sep. 14, 1994) (not designated for publication). Applicant,
through habeas counsel, filed an application and an amended application for a writ of habeas corpus
in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded them to this Court. See TEX. CODE
CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.
The issues concern new evidence that has emerged since Causey’s trial. It includes DNA
implicating an alternate suspect, testimony from witnesses contradicting parts of Causey’s
2
confession, and allegations of police misconduct. This evidence suggests that another person may
have been involved in the crime. Based on this evidence, Applicant contends that he is actually
innocent, argues that false testimony contributed to his conviction, and says that the State failed to
disclose favorable evidence. The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing and entered findings.
It recommends denying the actual innocence claim, see Ex parte Elizondo, 947 S.W.2d 202 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1996), but granting habeas corpus relief based on false testimony, see Ex parte
Weinstein, 421 S.W.3d 656 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014), and the suppression of favorable evidence, see
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963).
This Court has made an independent review of the record, which includes habeas counsel’s
objections regarding the trial court’s findings, particularly on actual innocence. Although this Court
does not find that the evidence shows Applicant to be actually innocent, this Court finds that habeas
relief should be granted based on the State’s unknowing use of false testimony. The judgment in
cause number 0915672 in the 331st District Court of Travis County is set aside, and Applicant shall
answer the charges as set out in the indictment. The trial court shall issue any necessary orders
within ten days from the date of this Court’s mandate.
Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice–Correctional
Institutions Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles.
Delivered: April 16, 2025
Publish