in Re: Ernesto Castillo ( 2022 )

DISMISSED and Opinion Filed December 30, 2022 S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-22-01317-CV IN RE ERNESTO CASTILLO, Relator Original Proceeding from the 302nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-17-17721 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle1 Opinion by Justice Reichek Relator Ernesto Castillo petitions this Court for a writ of mandamus compelling the trial court to vacate the trial court’s “Order Holding Respondent in Contempt for Failure to Pay Child Support[, ]Granting Judgment for Arrearages, and Suspending Commitment.” By order dated December 19, 2022, we informed relator that his petition and appendix in this proceeding did not comply with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure in three ways. First, the appendix attached to relator’s petition contained unredacted sensitive information, including financial account numbers and a minor’s name, 1 Justice Carlyle not participating. birthdate, and address in violation of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.9. See TEX. R. APP. P. 9.9. Second, although relator included a properly authenticated transcript of the testimony adduced at an August 4, 2022 hearing, the transcript did not include the exhibits offered into evidence. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7(a). Third, many of the documents included in relator’s appendix were not properly sworn or certified copies. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.3(k), 52.7(a). We struck relator’s petition and appendix and granted relator leave to re-file a petition and appendix that complied with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure on or before December 22, 2022. We cautioned relator that a failure to re-file as permitted by our order may result in dismissal of this cause without further notice. On December 22, 2022, relator re-filed his Petition for Writ of Mandamus, which included an attached Appendix (together, Amended Petition) in this proceeding. Although relator corrected some of the deficiencies identified in our December 19, 2022 order, relator failed to redact all sensitive information as ordered by the Court. The Amended Petition still contains instances where sensitive information remains unredacted, including the minor’s name, birthdate, and address. –2– Accordingly, because relator has not filed a petition and appendix that complies with the Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure as ordered by this Court, we STRIKE relator’s Amended Petition and DISMISS this original proceeding. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c), 52.8(a). /Amanda L. Reichek/ AMANDA L. REICHEK JUSTICE 221317F.P05 –3–