in Re Juan Angel Guerra ( 2014 )

NUMBER 13-14-00197-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
IN RE JUAN ANGEL GUERRA
On Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez Justices Rodriguez and Longoria
Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1
On March 28, 2014, relator, Juan Angel Guerra, filed a petition for writ of habeas
corpus through which he seeks release from incarceration for himself, a practicing
attorney, and his client, who are both being held incarcerated on contempt. According to
the petition for writ of habeas corpus, the Honorable Elia C. Lopez, presiding judge of the
404th District Court of Cameron County, Texas, ordered relator’s client, who is
unidentified in the petition, to be held in contempt and taken into custody, and “[w]ithout
1 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) (“When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not
required to do so.”); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).
1
due process, and notice, the court decided to find me in contempt also.” The petition
does not provide further explanation regarding the nature of the underlying case or the
proceedings resulting in incarceration, and is not accompanied by any supporting
documentation in the form of an appendix or record.
The purpose of a habeas corpus proceeding is not to determine the ultimate guilt
or innocence of the relator, but only to ascertain whether the relator has been unlawfully
confined. Ex parte Gordon, 584 S.W.2d 686, 688 (Tex. 1979). In a habeas corpus
proceeding, the order or judgment being challenged is presumed to be valid. In re R.E.D.,
278 S.W.3d 850, 855 (Tex. App.—Houston [1 Dist.] 2009, orig. proceeding); In re Turner,
177 S.W.3d 284, 288 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, orig. proceeding); Ex parte
Occhipenti, 796 S.W.2d 805, 809 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1990, orig. proceeding).
In order to obtain relief by habeas corpus, the relator must establish that the underlying
order is void because of a lack of jurisdiction or because the relator was deprived of liberty
without due process of law. In re Turner, 177 S.W.3d at 288; In re Butler, 45 S.W.3d 268,
270 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, orig. proceeding). The relator bears the burden
of showing that he is entitled to relief. In re Munks, 263 S.W.3d 270, 272–73 (Tex. App.—
Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, orig. proceeding); In re Turner, 177 S.W.3d at 288.
The form and requirements for an original appellate proceeding seeking
extraordinary relief, such as a petition for writ of habeas corpus, are delineated by the
Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See generally TEX. R. APP. P. 52. In addition to
other requirements, the relator must include a statement of facts supported by citations
to “competent evidence included in the appendix or record,” and must also provide “a
clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to
2
authorities and to the appendix or record.” See generally TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3. In this
regard, it is clear that relator must furnish an appendix or record sufficient to support the
claim for relief. See id. R. 52.3(k) (specifying the required contents for the appendix); R.
52.7(a) (specifying the required contents for the record).
The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of habeas
corpus and the applicable law, is of the opinion that relator has not met his burden to
obtain relief. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied without
prejudice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a).
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the 28th
day of March, 2014.
3