The opinion
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
OF TEXAS
NO. WR-93,812-01
In Re State of Texas Ex Rel. KIM OGG, Relator
ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
AND EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
HARRIS COUNTY
Per curiam.
ORDER
We have before us a motion for leave to file a petition for a writ of mandamus and
the associated petition for a writ of mandamus. Relator has asked that we expedite the
ruling in this matter.
In November 1993, a jury convicted Arthur Brown Jr. of a June 1992 capital
murder. See T EX. P ENAL C ODE § 19.03(a). Based on the jury’s answers to the special
issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 37.071, the trial
court sentenced Brown to death. This Court affirmed Brown’s conviction and sentence
Ogg - 2
on direct appeal. Brown v. State, No. AP-71,817 (Tex. Crim. App. Dec. 18, 1996) (not
designated for publication). We also denied relief on Brown’s initial post-conviction writ
of habeas corpus application. Ex parte Brown, No. WR-26,178-02 (Tex. Crim. App. June
18, 2008) (not designated for publication).
Brown filed a subsequent writ application in the trial court on November 3, 2014,
and it was forwarded to this Court. We remanded one claim to the trial court. After the
case was returned to this Court, we denied relief on the remanded claim and dismissed the
rest. Ex parte Brown, No. WR-26,178-03 (Tex. Crim. App. Oct. 18, 2017) (not
designated for publication).
On April 6, 2022, Relator filed in the trial court a proposed order setting an
execution date. If signed by Respondent, Relator’s order would set an August 31, 2022
execution date for Brown. Brown filed a pleading opposing the setting of an execution
date.
In a hearing on whether to sign the proposed order to set Brown’s execution,
Respondent said that she had reviewed the parties’ pleadings and that she would not sign
the order. Instead, she stated that she would appoint counsel for Brown because his
pleading opposing the setting of an execution date indicated that Brown “is going to file a
[subsequent] writ and needs a new lawyer.”
Relator thereafter filed the pleading currently before us. Before issuing a decision
on Relator’s motion for leave to file, this Court would like to hear from Respondent.
Ogg - 3
Therefore, we order Respondent, the Honorable Natalia Cornelio, Judge of the 351 st
District Court, to file in this Court on or before Friday, May 27, 2022, a response to
Relator’s pleadings. Real party in interest Brown is also invited to respond. Brown’s
response is due within the same time period.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 25th DAY OF MAY, 2022.
Do Not Publish