# Buck, Duane Edward

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · November 20, 2013 · 418 S.W.3d 98

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9812176

## Case

- **Full name:** Ex Parte Duane Edward BUCK
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** November 20, 2013
- **Citations:** 418 S.W.3d 98; 2013 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1733; 2013 WL 6081001
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Alcala, Price, Johnson
- **Cited by:** 11 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9812176

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that, "when an applicant's statutory entitlement to minimally competent *926assistance of habeas counsel has been denied, and where such denial has led to the forfeiture of a substantial claim for relief, this Court should declare the initial filing improper and adjudi…

## Opinion text

ORDER
PER CURIAM.
This is a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, § 5.
In May 1997, Applicant was convicted of the offense of capital murder. The jury answered the special issues submitted under Article 37.071, TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC., and the trial court, accordingly, set punishment at death. This Court affirmed Applicant’s conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Buck v. State, No. AP-72,810 (Tex.Crim.App. April 28, 1999). This Court denied relief on Applicant’s initial post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Buck, No. WR-57,004-01 (Tex.Crim.App. October 15, 2003). This Court dismissed Applicant’s second post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Buck, No. WR-57,004-02 (Tex.Crim.App. October 15, 2003). Applicant’s instant post-conviction application for writ of habeas corpus was received in this Court on March 28, 2013.
Applicant presents three allegations in the instant application. We have reviewed the application and find that Applicant has failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 11.071, § 5(a). Accordingly, we dismiss the application as an abuse of the writ without considering the merits of the claims.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
ALCALA, J., filed a dissenting statement in which PRICE and JOHNSON, JJ„ joined.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9812176. Public record. Not legal advice.