in Re Robert Ruiz Guitierrez, Relator ( 2014 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
No. 07-14-00406-CV
IN RE ROBERT RUIZ GUITIERREZ, RELATOR
OPINION ON ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
December 5, 2014
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.
Relator Robert Ruiz Guitierrez files this original proceeding for writ of habeas
corpus and contends that the twelve days between the time the trial court orally
committed him to the Lynn County Jail in Tahoka, Texas, and actually signed a written
decree ordering his commitment violated his due process rights. We agree and grant
the writ for habeas relief.
According to the record, a hearing was held on May 30, 2014. At the hearing,
Guitierrez was found to be in contempt, and on that same day, the trial court directed
him to “be jailed in the Lynn County jail until he posts a $70,000.00 cash bond.” The
written order manifesting that oral pronouncement was signed on June 11, 2014, that is,
approximately twelve days after Gutierrez was jailed.
A person may not be imprisoned for contempt occurring outside the trial court’s
presence without a written order of commitment. Ex parte Amaya, 748 S.W.2d 224, 224
(Tex. 1988) (orig. proceeding); In re Brown, 114 S.W.3d 7, 9 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2003,
orig. proceeding). Nonetheless, a contemnor may be detained for a short, reasonable
time via an oral directive while the written judgment of contempt and order of
commitment are prepared and executed. Ex parte Amaya, 748 S.W.2d at 225.
However, our Supreme Court has held that a two or three day delay between
commitment under a verbal command and execution of the requisite documents was
not such a short and reasonable time. Id. This court has held that a four day delay was
too long. Ex parte Morgan, 886 S.W.2d 829, 832 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1994, orig.
proceeding).
Guitierrez was not found in contempt for an act occurring in the trial court’s
presence. Thus, the trial court could not jail him for more than a short, reasonable
period of time without a written order or judgment. The delay between the verbal
directive and written decree at bar exceeded the periods found excessive and
unreasonable in both Amaya and Morgan. Thus, Guitierrez’ detention violated due
process, which violation rendered the judgment and order of commitment void. Ex parte
Morgan, supra.
Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus and order Robert
Ruiz Guitierrez discharged from confinement.
Brian Quinn
Chief Justice
2