law-habeas-corpus

law-habeas-corpus | contempt of court caselaw | child support contempt | violation of SAPCR order |

Court of Appeals possesses original habeas jurisdiction in a case in which a person’s
liberty is restrained for a violation of an order, judgment, or decree in a civil case. See
Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221(d) (West 2004). Generally in such a case, neither appeal
nor mandamus is the appropriate vehicle for relief; “a petition for writ of habeas corpus is
generally the only method for attacking an order of contempt.” In re Reece, No. 09-0520, 2
2011 WL 2112786, *7 (Tex. May 27, 2011) (citing Deramus v. Thornton, 160 Tex. 494,
333 S.W.2d 824, 827 (1960))

HABEAS CORPUS CASES IN THE HOUSTON COURTS OF APPEALS (FROM
FAMILY COURT CASES)

The purpose of a writ of habeas corpus is not to determine the guilt or innocence of the contemnor, but
rather to determine whether he was afforded due process of law, or whether the order of contempt is void.
Ex parte Gordon, 584 S.W.2d 686, 688 (Tex. 1979) (orig. proceeding). A writ of habeas corpus will be
issued if the order underlying the contempt order is void, or if the contempt order itself is void. Ex parte
Shaffer, 649 S.W.2d 300, 302 (Tex. 1983) (orig. proceeding); Gordon, 584 S.W.2d at 688. An order is void
if it is beyond the power of the court to enter it or if it deprives the relator of liberty without due process of
law. In re Markowitz, 25 S.W.3d 1, 3 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, orig. proceeding). The relator
bears the burden of showing his entitlement to relief in a habeas corpus proceeding. Ex parte Occhipenti,
796 S.W.2d 805, 808 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1990, orig. proceeding). In a habeas corpus
proceeding, the order or judgment is presumed to be valid unless the contemnor discharges his burden to
show otherwise. Id. at 809.
In re Bishop (Tex.App. - Houston [14th Dist.] Feb. 4, 2010)(Anderson)
(habeas corpus, child support comtempt order, revocation of suspension, void orders)
Because both the contempt order and revocation orders are void, we grant relator’s petition for writ of
habeas corpus, order relator released from the bond set by this court on November 24, 2009, and order
relator discharged from custody.
MOTION OR WRIT GRANTED: Opinion by Justice Anderson
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Anderson and Boyce
14-09-00990-CV In Re Jason Paul Bishop
Appeal from 306th District Court of Galveston County
Trial Court Judge: Janis Louise Yarbrough

Habeas Corpus Standard
This court will issue a writ of habeas corpus if the contempt order is void because it deprives the relator of
liberty without due process of law or because it was beyond the power of the court to issue. Ex parte Swate,
922 S.W.2d 122, 124 (Tex. 1996). The contempt order must clearly state in what respect the court’s earlier
order has been violated and must clearly specify the punishment imposed by the court. Ex parte Shaklee,
939 S.W.2d 144, 145 (Tex. 1997).
Ex Parte Davis (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Jan. 6, 2010) (habeas corpus petition denied)
(SAPCR contempt order based on health care provisions in SAPCR order found partially void)
MOTION OR WRIT DENIED: Per Curiam
Before Justices Yates, Frost, and Brown.
14-09-00943-CV Ex Parte Stephanie Davis
Appeal from 245th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Judge Annette Kuntz
We conclude that the trial court’s contempt findings in violations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 are void. We further
conclude that the portion of the contempt order setting an ending date for relator’s sentence is void.
Accordingly, we modify the trial court’s order (1) by striking as void the trial court’s contempt findings in
violations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 and (2) by deleting the ending date on relator’s sentence from the order. The
remaining portion of the order is valid and enforceable. In all other respects, relator’s petition for writ of
habeas corpus is denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(c).

In Re Israel Dominguez, Sr. (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] May 5, 2008) (Hedges) (child support contempt,
commitment order void, habeas granted)
MOTION OR WRIT GRANTED: Opinion by Chief Justice Adele Hedges
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Seymore and Brown
14-08-00206-CV In Re Israel Dominguez, Sr.
Appeal from 247th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Bonnie Crane Hellums

In Re Israel Dominguez, Sr. (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] May 5, 2008) (Hedges)
(child support contempt, commitment order void, habeas granted)
MOTION OR WRIT GRANTED: Opinion by Chief Justice Hedges
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Seymore and Brown
14-08-00206-CV In Re Israel Dominguez, Sr.
Appeal from 247th District Court of Harris County
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Bonnie Crane Hellums

TEXAS CAUSES OF ACTION ELEMENTS | HOUSTON CASE LAW | HO USTON COURTS OF APPEALS |
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS OPINIONS
HOUSTON OPINIONS HOME PAGE