Daniel Plata Estrada
Murderer- Gender
- male
- Country
- USA
- Location
- Harris County, Texas, USA
- Date of birth
- August 2, 1975
- Age at first offence
- 20
- Characteristics
- robbery, mentally ill
- Victim profile
- Murlidhar Mahbubani (convenience store clerk)
- Method of murder
- Shooting (.25 caliber pistol)
- Date(s) of murder
- May 6, 1995
- Years active
- 1995
- Date of arrest
- —
- Status
-
Life imprisonment
Sentenced to death on December 11, 1996; commuted to life in prison on January 16, 2008
Background
Daniel Angel Plata Estrada was convicted of capital murder on October 14, 1996. He applied for a writ of habeas corpus asserting that he was mentally retarded and may not be executed.
Floresvinda Estrada was the mother of Daniel Angel Plata Estrada.
Trial
A jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 11.071, in favor of the State. In accordance with the jury’s answers, the trial court sentenced Daniel Angel Plata Estrada to death.
Appeals
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit opinion 02-21168 concerned an application for writ of habeas corpus in the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, styled:
- “EX PARTE DANIEL ANGEL PLATA ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS IN CAUSE NO. 693143-B FROM THE 351ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY”
The opinion was a per curiam opinion.
The conviction and sentence were affirmed in an unpublished opinion, Plata v. State, No. 72,639 (Tex. Crim. App. July 8, 1998).
Daniel Angel Plata Estrada’s initial Article 11.071 application for writ of habeas corpus was denied in an unpublished order, Ex parte Plata, No. WR-46,749-01 (Tex. Crim. App. Oct. 4, 2000).
Habeas corpus proceedings
Daniel Angel Plata Estrada filed a subsequent habeas writ application on July 18, 2003, asserting that he was mentally retarded and could not be executed after the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), which held that the death penalty was excessive punishment for a mentally retarded criminal.
The claim met the requirements for consideration under Article 11.071, Section 5, and the matter was remanded to the trial court for resolution. Ex parte Plata, No. 46,749-02 (Tex. Crim. App. Sep. 29, 2004).
The trial court held a hearing where there was testimony that Daniel Angel Plata Estrada was mentally retarded and testimony that he was not mentally retarded. The trial court found that he was mentally retarded and recommended that relief be granted. The trial court returned the case to the Court of Criminal Appeals with its findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The Court of Criminal Appeals reviewed the record of the proceedings on remand. The Court concluded that the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law were supported by the record and adopted them as its own.
The Court of Criminal Appeals concluded that Daniel Angel Plata Estrada was mentally retarded and may not be executed. The relief sought was granted.
Outcome
Daniel Angel Plata Estrada’s sentence was reformed from death to life imprisonment.
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 16 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2008.
Spotted an error, or have more information about this case?